Jef Rouner Explains Why Some Statements Are Wrong, and Not Opinions

.
I'm not sure who Jef Rouner is, or even whether it's a he or a she, but they sure write a funny article.

Some people, s/he says, make certain statements, and claim that because it is an opinion, it cannot be wrong.

Wrong.  Jef Rouner goes through all sorts of reasons why such statements could still be wrong, or even when they're opinions, they could still be not worthy of any sort of respects, and just a hair this side of wrong.  When reasoning with incomplete data, not-wrongness is no longer black and white; you can be not wrong, or you can be wrong in various degrees.

I have my own opinions, or rather, points of view, regarding the subject.

First of all, a conclusion from various premisses is not an opinion.  If it has been made according to logically correct rules, then it will be right, otherwise it will be wrong.  To make a statement like "It is widely accepted that Democrats raise taxes.  I don't want higher taxes, therefore, in my opinion, nobody should vote for Democrats, and anyway, that's my opinion, so you can't say I'm wrong" are so incredibly wrong that one cannot even begin to explain why to someone who is not ready to listen to a long story.  Firstly, Democrats have raised taxes, but so have Republicans.  (Check out how high Reagan raised taxes.)  Secondly, this opinion is presented in the form of an argument, signaled by the use of "therefore".  Still, such a statement should simply be altered to say that, in the opinion of this person, people should all vote the way he or she would like them to, regardless of their personal preferences.

Jef also points out that to express the opinion that "David Tennant was the best Dr. Who" is not justifiable from anyone who has not seen episodes of the TV series from before 2005 (where, presumably, David Tennant would have had stiff competition from other incarnations of Dr. Who).  We're all familiar with close acquaintances who have outrageous opinion, who either have not seen evidence contrary to their beliefs, or have deliberately closed their eyes to such evidence.  I think we can all agree that the opinions of those sorts of people can be assessed as just plain wrong, even if they are opinions.  Read the article; it is beautifully written.

Arch