A common sentiment in US culture is the claim that everyone has a right to his/her opinion. Individual beliefs, we are told, are to be respected. What is "fine" for you may not be "fine" for me, and, so long as no one is harmed, we should repect eachother's different beliefs. What is the best argument against this kind of reasoning?
2007-09-27 12:47:39 · 13 answers · asked by J. Hiatus 2 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
You can judge all you want. It's how you act on your judgements that need to remain civil.
You can think skydiving is stupid. Whatever. But if you attempt to outlaw skydiving because of that opinion, then it's not your judgement that bothers me, it's the actions you take because of your judgement.
Making personal judgements are healthy. By judging other peoples views, you are forcing yourself to consider why those views are held. This will presumably lead to a more enlightened (but not necessarily different) opinion on your own viewpoint. And that's never bad/
People who don't judge are avoiding the act because they don't want to risk changing their own opinion as a result of judging anothers.
Of course, that's just my judgement!
2007-09-27 13:23:10 · answer #1 · answered by freebird 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
This claim that everyone sees things differently harms and scratches away at morality, just because what one person may see as perfectly fine, it doesn't have to be perfectly fine. Example: segregation. Whites and blacks separated and not equal; the South thought it was okay, but judging from a common sense and morality standpoint, it was not okay. It's all about how it affects others right? If its something trivial like wearing a mohawk or having piercings, then nobody's to judge, true. But, that can lead to even more daring things, and at some level, there has to be a point where it ISN'T fine any longer.
2007-09-27 19:57:09 · answer #2 · answered by Lutremi 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think you necessarily have to judge someone based on their opinions differing from yours, but there comes a point and time when you can begin to question their credibility and sanity.
I mean a person may say I think that there are Aliens out there. This is an opinion, there isn't really any reason to judge their opinion one way or another. Then the same person says I know their are Aliens out there. Well now it has become a statement of where facts come into play. How do you know? what evidence do you have? And then if the same person says Aliens visit my home every night at 9:00 this is a statement where you can really begin to evaluate the person and their credibility and like I said their sanity. Opinions are okay but when a person is unwilling to look at the facts, that's when you can start "looking" at that person.
2007-09-27 20:23:46 · answer #3 · answered by ? 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That claim supports a particular philosophy...its called relativism! It basically means that depending on where you live, your culture, society, etc. will directly influence your values, morals, opinions, etc. So your morals are relative to the time and place that you live, therefore it is illogical to judge anyone. There is no hierarchy of right and wrong all acts are "equal" because they are not comparable outside of your own "society". The counter argument is that you believe that there is an absolute truth and that morals and values are not relative. So in other words there are certain truths that are unchanging and apply to everyone. If I got confusing or didnt explain it good enough email me! Hope that helped!
2007-09-30 01:35:59 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
everyone has the right to their own opinion. The only way to really debate is to find a common truth you have to have a foundation for the discussion to begin with...otherwise it is all opinion. my fav is the argument does God exsist? Most people who are asking want to know why you have a faith and they do not so you sort of strip the question to its very basic level and go on from there....hope I helped you...Really it is silly to say everyones see things differently if that were entirely true then commonality would be extinct. We base our very reality on what all see and all can attest to. I would not argue with the reasoning common sense and reason keep little company these days. redirect the question and keep it simple is helpful
2007-09-27 20:08:41 · answer #5 · answered by just duky 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well respect does not imply that everyone is right. It merely means that we should listen to each others opinion and take it into consideration. We have no right to force others to believe what we do but we do have the responsibility to voice out our beliefs.
As to the statement "Everyone sees things differently, so who am I to judge?" The best argument against this relativism, is that we live in a life with consequences. And our judgments, including our refusal to judge, would have implications that matter. We must judge other people's opinion. This is not disrespectful, its our responsibility to society.
2007-09-27 19:59:47 · answer #6 · answered by ragdefender 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If the majority of people proven to have right beliefs is against a certain opinion, it may be incorrect.
2007-09-27 19:51:03 · answer #7 · answered by Coin 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is no argument - it's a true and valid argument.
Would you argue against 2+2=4?
2007-09-27 20:02:31 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The best argument against this claim is that there are social norms, religious norms, and societal norms that must be followed by everyone to ensure harmony in a community. For example, child molestation. What if a child molester said that molesting children is fine for him and who are you to judge. Well, our society has norms and values and understands that this wrong even if someone says that it is OK. I hope this helps you.
2007-09-27 19:59:50 · answer #9 · answered by ADG 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The best argument is simple but devastating.
To say, "I shouldn't judge" is in itself to make a certain judgment, so it is a self-defeating proposition.
2007-09-27 19:55:19 · answer #10 · answered by Christopher F 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋