It's logically an opinion, because it's a said statement, that you have no solid proof in a manner like you can prove that something is square. However- if it's an opinion, there must be a factual opposition, to make it an opinion. However- it seems to me that proving that drunk driving is indeed good and beneficial is impossible without thoroughly lying just for the sake of it. So- the lack of opposition would make it a fact. However- there is no way to solidly prove that it is in fact a fact either, because you can't do something like measuring the angle to prove that it's 90 degrees, claiming that it's a right angle. So- what do you good people of answers think, should this statement be classified as fact, ot fiction? What do you think?
2007-12-12 17:55:31 · 10 answers · asked by Red Raven 2 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
This is philosophy people... I don't drive yet period. Much less drunk. Much less do I want to drive drunk, or get drunk in the first place. I've x's on my hands- I'm straightedge
2007-12-12 18:06:16 · update #1
People- if it's fact- then there can't be ANYTHING said to prove it wrong. And although i'm sane- and realize the tragedy stemming from such a stupidity- just for the sake of this question I'll provide this argument: "Drunk drivers are hopelessly stupid, and would only live to create mistakes hurting others (as much as can be expected from them) and breed more geniuses like themselves, so they might as well be gone from this world in such a fashion, or kill someone who's bad enough to deserve to die in an accident with them". So there- it's a controversial point, and I'll hear "how horrible of you" in response, but it's a point already- and therefore the initial statement cannot be a fact.
2007-12-12 18:13:22 · update #2
I think you should do another bong hit.........lighten up and
DON'T drive anywhere.
2007-12-12 18:01:10 · answer #1 · answered by Cow Poke 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Okay, tomorrow, when you wake up, reread what you wrote and asked. You seem to be intelligent, but what I am reading is going around in circles. The definition of bad in the context in which you used it in your sentence is "not good in any manner or degree." If you can find a situation/occurance that proved drinking and driving to be good, I would accept your statement as opinion. If you can PROVE that it is good, then go into law and spend your career defending those breaking our moral law of Not drinking and driving. Convince a court, judge, and or jury that Drunk driving is good and have the law changed. Good luck to ya!!!
Edit to the above ansewer, he did not say Drinking is bad, he said Drunk driving is bad. There is a difference.
2007-12-12 18:41:10 · answer #2 · answered by forestbythesea 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
drunk driving is a fact, the level of intoxication of a man may differ from the others, but still, a man can be considered drunk when there was an in-take of alcohol,
bad- where does the word bad came from? it's because there was the absence of goodness (evil). to say one is bad is the same as saying that the opposite is good. but who are we to judge what is bad and good? even the bible would say that we were created uniquely from the others
drunk driving is bad makes the statement an opinion, a personal point of view, there might be instances that drunk driving is good. like edgar allan poe, when his high with drugs, he can write beautiful poems, there are people who can do beautiful things when they are drugged, drunk, and/or having sex.
2007-12-12 18:38:09 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think drunken karaoke should be sung by very-very angry people, and often. It would be more entertaining to me, if I thought a fight might break out in the middle of an inspirational Journey, or Neil Diamond song. Also, I think if Simon Cowell ever got arrested for something, he should be required to do about 2 months mandatory community service to listen to, and rate this Drunken Karaoke.
2016-05-23 08:23:44 · answer #4 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
what evidence do you want? There are 000' killed each year on our roads. 1/3 have drink over the limit. Now - yes - this may be only circumstancual evidence but when cuppled with tests of people how have drunk, on simulaters and gett
2007-12-12 22:43:15 · answer #5 · answered by Freethinking Liberal 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
fact because 13 years ago a drunk driver killed my friends 19 year old brother that was going to work. so you decide but i think if your drunk stay there or take a taxi home.save a life or you may die in car accident also.my friends mother lost her baby of 5 boys to a drunk driver.
2007-12-12 18:06:04 · answer #6 · answered by mags 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Driving drunk is stupid and reckless. Fact.
The weight of evidence and fact that drunk driving has no conceivable benefits outweighs it as a positive statement. You're not doing philosophy, just being obtuse.
2007-12-12 18:30:59 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Hmm, lets see. Drinking reduces your reaction speed. Drinking impairs your vision and your ability to make wise decisions. Reduced reaction speed, the inability to make decisions, and poor vision all make somebody a poor driver. So, by the transitive property of drinking, you can prove that:
drinkin + driving = stupid
2007-12-12 18:07:10 · answer #8 · answered by Katie A 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
fact....what good has ever came out of drunk driving? you risk your life, risk others....fact.
2007-12-12 18:05:45 · answer #9 · answered by SUN vs. MOON 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I can not have read that right. Are you kidding?
2007-12-12 18:04:20 · answer #10 · answered by Ruthie 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋