Board 8 > AoD 973: Opinions can be wrong.

(+) Yeah! (+)

Agree.

--
Captain Tracy Mombaro and Agent Mirasuke Inhara: Two of the toughest, hottest furrs you'll ever meet.

S***, Inviso, you still exist?

--
~ Team Tilde, director

...Yes?

--
Captain Tracy Mombaro and Agent Mirasuke Inhara: Two of the toughest, hottest furrs you'll ever meet.

Agree.

--
Recorded B8 Mafia record: 13/24

http://www.ludix.com/moriarty/apology.html

I finally finished reading this article. Interesting. I obviously disagree with Brian Moriarty (as I said, I'd rather throw the distinction between art [kitsch] and Art out of the window, while Moriarty embraces it), but it offers insight on why Ebert thinks the way he thinks in the first place.

Aside from a few less important points (his explanation of intersubjectivity, presenting Pauline Kael as the movie "expert" while she was just an expert at best - Andrew Sarris, whom Kael vehemently disagreed with, was another), my biggest disappointment of the article was the conclusion:

An hour or two or spent playing Defense Grid or Plants vs Zombies isn't a waste of time. There's nothing wrong with recreation. We need it. I need it. It's good for me!

But when I feel the need for reflection, for insight, wisdom or consolation, I turn my computers off.

In spite of Moriarty's knowledge and the good arguments he presents, the article still concludes with the hopelessly outdated notion that video games are nothing more than "recreation," and that for reflection, insight, wisdom or consolation, we should turn elsewhere. An actual gamer could provide a better argument against this statement than me, but with story-based games like Kana: Little Sister (which I've played) and possibly Planescape: Torment (which I haven't played) existing, I don't think the statement holds much water.

Also, I didn't understand the following segment:

But is this enough? Does an artistic presentation make a game art?

Of course it doesn't. None of you would presume to call that game "art" unless you had a chance to play it first, or at least watch somebody else playing it.

The identity of a game emerges from its mechanics and affordances, not the presentation that exposes them.

Why doesn't the presentation of a game make it art? It seems like he wants to make a clear distinction between "mechanics" and "presentation" - he's arguing that the mechanics of a game are unable to make a game art, and that the presentation doesn't "count" because that's not an actual part of the game itself...? I don't get it.

--
Full rap metal jacket ~ Method Man

Well, opinions can certainly be based on erroneous facts.

I'd still say disagree though. An opinion is merely your belief based on the facts you either know or think you know. Opinions sort of go beyond the realm of right or wrong, and merely just are. Perception and factual information can be incorrect. I don't think opinions can. Saying an opinion is incorrect is like saying green is seven. You're ascribing characteristics to something and defining it in a way that doesn't make sense to define it.

In my opinion. :)

--
Moops?
"I thought you were making up diseases? That's spontaneous dental hydroplosion."

The schools of thought here

1. Literal (Opinions, by definition, can not be wrong)
2. Fact Based (Opinions can be wrong, because they can be based on error)
3. Double Meaning (Opinions can't be wrong but they can be WRONG)

--
Chrono1219

agree

--
http://www.smkgp150cc.com/images/toadspin.gif
Black Turtle ate all my bananas.

disagree only because my opinions aren't wrong

--
Who says you're not perfect?
Who says you're not worth it?

Pretty easy Agree. Not all opinions are subjective, even if they are personal.

Mr Lasastryke posted...
Why doesn't the presentation of a game make it art? It seems like he wants to make a clear distinction between "mechanics" and "presentation" - he's arguing that the mechanics of a game are unable to make a game art, and that the presentation doesn't "count" because that's not an actual part of the game itself...? I don't get it.

That goes back to an argument between ludology (the stance that games must be analyzed in terms of their gameplay) and narratology (the stance that games can be analyzed entirely by traditional literary analysis techniques).

Which is also his rebuttal to your other points. Can you make a game that's basically a movie or basically a book and have it be art? I suppose so, yes. You could make a game where the entire game was "press A to start an FMV that is the full movie Gone with the Wind"; maybe you could even pause the movie and have your character and go for a bathroom break--extra agency! But what's artistic here is the movie, not the gameplay. It doesn't say "games are an art form" so much as it says "you can inject other art forms into a game". Kind of like Judge Judy opens with Beethoven Symphony Number 5--does that make Judge Judy art?

His argument goes that in order for games to be considered a new art form, distinct from movies, plays, and books, the gameplay has to be a big part of what makes an "art game" artistic.

--
Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision

seriously guys

--
GameFAQs isn't going to be merged in with GameSpot or any other site. We're not going to strip out the soul of the site. -CJayC

Disagree, Everyone has a right to their opinion, even if it is unpopular. The only time I'd honestly say someone's opinion is "wrong" is if they're trolling.

--
http://i.imgur.com/WRgfu.gif

it is my opinion that gravity does not exist


(agree)

--
http://alison-brie.net/galleries/3.jpg

Agreed.

If your opinion is that grass is actually purple with beige polka dot, that would be wrong. It is, in fact, not that color unless tampered with by any human resources.

If your opinion was that Michael Jordan is the worst basketball player of all-time, that's just simply wrong. No one can factually say if he's the best, but to call him one of the worst would be completely erroneous.

--
http://www.yourgamercards.net/trophy/a/NathanDrake90.png

From: CherryCokes | #554
it is my opinion that gravity does not exist

This is a belief not an opinion.

--
Chrono1219

Agree. Opinions based on poor premises or bad reasoning are wrong (especially in the moral sense). For instance,

"Obama is not trustworthy because he is an open Muslim."

Is wrong. (bad premises)

"Obama is not trustworthy because he is secretly a Muslim."

Is still silly, but at least reasonably sound.

"Obama is good because Bush sucked."

Is wrong. (conclusion does not follow from premises)

"Obama is good because he got important stuff done that Bush didn't."

Is better, but still wrong, for the same reason. (this would be fine with the addition of "Bush was a good president" as a premise)

"Obama is better than Bush because he got more important stuff done."

Is fine.

--
assert(!hotterThan(foo, "Hot Nymphomaniacal Lesbian Mind-Controlling Dominatrix Fairy Doctors with glasses"))

Chrono1219 posted...
From: CherryCokes | #554
it is my opinion that gravity does not exist

This is a belief not an opinion.

opinion
1.
a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2.
a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.

--
There is no shame in not knowing; the shame lies in not finding out

From: SovietOmega | #118
opinion
1.
a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2.
a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.

The problem here is that people aren't differentiating between these two definitions in their arguments.

Because they are different.

--
"Hold on a minute! That testimony stinks!"
"Witness! You can't just say 'Hello' and expect us to get anywhere! I want you to testify!"

Even so, for him to say it is a belief and not an opinion, when an opinion is perfectly capable of being a belief by definition, is fallacious.

Yay semantics >_<

--
There is no shame in not knowing; the shame lies in not finding out

That's because he's arguing the second definition, not the first.

Heck, it doesn't even fall under the first because:

From: SovietOmega | #118
that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.

That doesn't really fall under "Gravity doesn't exist" being an opinion.

Saying gravity doesn't exist is just factually wrong.

It's not really a matter of opinion.

Saying "I believe 2+2 = 5" isn't an opinion.

It's simply factually wrong.

--
"Why must we always choose between certain death and probable death?"
"I'm in an epic battle to the death, FIGURE IT OUT YOURSELF!"

You can not have an opinion that gravity does not exist. You can only believe or not believe (with the latter being wrong)

All Opinions are beliefs, but not all beliefs are opinions.

--
Chrono1219

I could conceive of a person who has lived their entire life in a flotation tank or in a zero g environment. They could then have an opinion that gravity does not exist because obviously objects float around and are not subject to external forces.

--
There is no shame in not knowing; the shame lies in not finding out

LeonhartFour posted...
From: SovietOmega | #118
opinion
1.
a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2.
a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.
The problem here is that people aren't differentiating between these two definitions in their arguments.

Because they are different.

If they are, then they overlap heavily.

For example's sake, let's suppose that it is my personal view that the world is not rotating. After all, if it were rotating, then we should be getting thousand mile an hour winds at all times!

This is a personal view, personal appraisal, and a belief or judgement that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.

In fact, the main difference I see is that the second definition does not have the clause of "insufficient grounds to produce complete certainty". So...the second definition, it could be my personal view that "1+1=2"--but not for the first definition as I can prove that from axiomatic principles.

--
Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision

Though, really, dictionary definitions don't work all that well regardless.

"insufficient to produce complete certainty" describes...every scientific result ever.

--
Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision

From: SovietOmega | #123
I could conceive of a person who has lived their entire life in a flotation tank or in a zero g environment. They could then have an opinion that gravity does not exist because obviously objects float around and are not subject to external forces.

They can have the belief that gravity does not exist, sure.

But it doesn't mean they're not wrong simply because they've never been exposed to it.

I can say Mongolians don't exist because I've never met one.

But it's factually wrong.

Not a matter of opinion.

The main difference I see between the first and second definition is that the second definition doesn't really fall into a matter of "Right or wrong." It's more "Personal preference," which can't be wrong. I can say "I prefer FFVII to OoT," and it's neither right nor wrong for me to have that preference.

--
"I couldn't stand a day without a past or future. I need to live each moment to keep fighting here and now."

"The main difference I see between the first and second definition is that the second definition doesn't really fall into a matter of "Right or wrong." It's more "Personal preference," which can't be wrong. I can say "I prefer FFVII to OoT," and it's neither right nor wrong for me to have that preference."

If you are asserting that the second definition is immune to right and wrong, but that the first is not, and that the first is still a valid definition of opinion, then by definition, some opinions are still capable of being wrong.

--
There is no shame in not knowing; the shame lies in not finding out

Oh, if you assert that opinions are beliefs in things that aren't provable or have yet to be proven, sure, they can be wrong. I just think some of the examples people are using to say "Opinions can be wrong" are a bit misleading because they are not actually opinions. They're a denial of facts as we know them.

I don't think I ever asserted that I didn't think opinions can be wrong. Not ALL of them can be wrong though because some of them are merely personal preference. However, some people are saying "Michael Jordan is a bad basketball player" is an example of an opinion being wrong, but you can use statistics to prove that he was one of the best. I think that's an instance where you can say that is factually wrong. You can argue about whether he's the best ever or not and neither will be wrong, but I think you can say someone is factually wrong if they try to argue he's a bad basketball player because statistics prove otherwise. I suppose some people can say you can't use statistics to "prove" something like that since statistics are often misleading, but that's neither here nor there.

So really, all these arguments are a result of the fact that not everyone here holds the same definition of what an opinion actually is.

--
Support Barret Wallace (Final Fantasy VII) for Character Battle IX!
http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/3834/banner1barret.jpg

Opinions on opinions of opinions...this topic <_>

--
There is no shame in not knowing; the shame lies in not finding out

LeonhartFour posted...
Saying "I believe 2+2 = 5" isn't an opinion.

It's simply factually wrong.

Actually, no. If you believe that the axioms math is built on are inconsistent and thus could produce the contradictory statement that 2 + 2 = 5, this is a perfectly valid opinion to hold.

--
assert(!hotterThan(foo, "Hot Nymphomaniacal Lesbian Mind-Controlling Dominatrix Fairy Doctors with glasses"))

Agree, they tend to be the most common type of opinion.

--
http://i55.tinypic.com/6jlws1.png
~~~~Yay~~~~

Disagree

--
"Principally I hate and detest the animal called man, although I heartily love John, Peter, Thomas and so forth" - Jonathan Swift
BT with the victory!

SovietOmega posted...
Opinions on opinions of opinions...this topic <_>

I know! best topic this board has had in ages!

Phase posted...
Actually, no. If you believe that the axioms math is built on are inconsistent and thus could produce the contradictory statement that 2 + 2 = 5, this is a perfectly valid opinion to hold.

That's...actually quite true. And since in the instance of inconsistent axioms 2+2=5 would be both a true and false statement, an opinion of "2+2=5" is wrong even if it's simultaneously right!

--
Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision

As for the definitions, hopefully everyone can see -clearly- that the first definition can yield wrong opinions.

The second definition, however close or not to the first one it might be, is a little trickier, but again, a personal view or appraisal can deal with both subjective or objective matters.

Thing about opinions is that often they deal with value. Something is usually "better" or "worse", or just plain "good" or "bad". And often it's difficult (even impossible) to be objective about value judgments until the parameters are clearly set. But of course it's possible.

From: metroid composite | #653
[quoted text]

That's...actually quite true. And since in the instance of inconsistent axioms 2+2=5 would be both a true and false statement, an opinion of "2+2=5" is wrong even if it's simultaneously right!

No, it's still a belief based on lack of knowledge. It is a false statement based on the actual laws of mathematics. It is impossible to have an opinion on something that is locked into pure fact this way.

You can have an opinion that 2+2 should equal 5. Or that the laws of math are stupid. But you can not have an opinion that 2+2 does=5.

--
Chrono1219

Agree.

Exhibit A) Some of the opinions I've seen on this board :P

--
Okay, Chief, take 'em away. I'm gonna go home and sleep with my wife. ~ Mr. Green
Enjoy the silence.

On my laptop, so I can't access my database to update nominations because I don't have Access on this PC. So for now, here's just a simple update.

Agree: 40
Disagree: 12

Denoms:
Dragon Quest VIII is the only amazing game in the series (Nom: Real Truth, Ulti) (Denom: Mortamor)

--
Zachnorn - <D
http://board8.wikia.com - Board 8 Wiki | http://www.stickam.com/profile/zachnorn - Game broadcasts