"My taste in music is better than yours"

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

But how do you determine whether an opinion on art is wrong? If someone says, "I think this song is good," how do you objectively prove that it's not a good song?

I do agree with the some of what you're saying. If I wanted an opinion on music, I would probably go to someone who knows something about music. But that doesn't mean their opinions are always more valid, just that they are more likely to be well-supported.

superfluidity

I don't think you can prove someone is wrong in their opinion about music. You could try to persuade them to change their own opinion by providing them with more information that would give them a broader perspective.

I don't disagree with that, but I would say that one should only do that it some situations.

For instance, it wouldn't make sense to change someone's opinion about a song, but it might make sense to change someone's opinion about a genre.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

I wasn't talking about your own opinion. Obviously.

I was talking about the fact that you didn't seem to realize that "It's a good thing he wasn't harmed" is an opinion, thereby making it reasonable to assume that you're not clear on what an opinion actually is.

chrisPperson

I hope you realize how many times you have contradicted yourself in this thread.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

I think you would make a good music critic. Your writing is really colorful and you seem to have a good knowledge about music without being rigid about it.

LJS9502_basic

Music reviews are giant opinions.

Many are well-supported and have a bit of factual conctent, but they are filled with subjective judgments and the ultimate conclusion about the peice is subjective.

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Then you misspoke....it was not an opinion statement as I expressed not my opinion but about the desired outcome...which is part of the definition. And since I posted it...it can be attributed as no one individual''s opinion either. LJS9502_basic

I hope you realize how many times you have contradicted yourself in this thread.

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Then you misspoke....it was not an opinion statement as I expressed not my opinion but about the desired outcome...which is part of the definition. And since I posted it...it can be attributed as no one individual''s opinion either. LJS9502_basic

I hope you realize how many times you have contradicted yourself in this thread.

Thats the point?

No-one is wrong, because it's all opinion no-one can be wrong.

Nibroc420

No one's opinion can be proved wrong, but their ability to form an opinion should be judged based on thier knowledge and experience.

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Then you misspoke....it was not an opinion statement as I expressed not my opinion but about the desired outcome...which is part of the definition. And since I posted it...it can be attributed as no one individual''s opinion either. LJS9502_basic

I hope you realize how many times you have contradicted yourself in this thread.

That link is not peer-reviewed and she doesn't offer citations. This would not pass muster in any academic setting.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"] The "desired outcome" is, by definition, an opinion.

I hope you realize how many times you have contradicted yourself in this thread.

chrisPperson

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

I think you would make a good music critic. Your writing is really colorful and you seem to have a good knowledge about music without being rigid about it.

GreySeal9

Music reviews are giant opinions.

Many are well-supported and have a bit of factual conctent, but they are filled with subjective judgments and the ultimate conclusion about the peice is subjective.

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Is it?....as I made the statement in regard solely on humanitarian terms and not personal opinion at all...you would be wrong. Personally...I'm apathetic.

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Is it?....as I made the statement in regard solely on humanitarian terms and not personal opinion at all...you would be wrong. Personally...I'm apathetic.

LJS9502_basic

You never stop putting words into people's mouths, do you? He never said those things. If you insist that he did, post quotes that show that he did say or imply that.

Morality is inherently subjective. It is based on value judgments. What one thinks is moral, another person might not. Not everyboddy thinks charity is a good thing.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"] The "desired outcome" is, by definition, an opinion.

I hope you realize how many times you have contradicted yourself in this thread.

GreySeal9

That link is not peer-reviewed and she doesn't offer citations. This would not pass muster in any academic setting.

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Is it?....as I made the statement in regard solely on humanitarian terms and not personal opinion at all...you would be wrong. Personally...I'm apathetic.

LJS9502_basic

As stated, morality is also subjective.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="chrisPperson"] I think you may be looking a bit too far into this.GreySeal9

You never stop putting words into people's mouths, do you? He never said those things. If you insist that he did, post quotes that show that he did say or imply that.

Morality is inherently subjective. It is based on value judgments. What one thinks is moral, another person might not. Not everyboddy thinks charity is a good thing.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Interesting comment there. Without develving into poptarts future career choices......you do know Grey that a music critic has to separate the subjective from the objective when reviewing....right?

LJS9502_basic

Music reviews are giant opinions.

Many are well-supported and have a bit of factual conctent, but they are filled with subjective judgments and the ultimate conclusion about the peice is subjective.

You can objectively deconstruct something and describe the parts, but you can't state if it's good or bad and still be objective as those are subjective judgments.

There's no rule saying that they have to be objective as possible. Music reviews are based on what the reviewer "thought" of an album, which is an opinion, which is in turn subjective.

Look at any review. You'll see tons of subjectivity.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="chrisPperson"] I think you may be looking a bit too far into this.chrisPperson

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

Music reviews are giant opinions.

Many are well-supported and have a bit of factual conctent, but they are filled with subjective judgments and the ultimate conclusion about the peice is subjective.

GreySeal9

You can objectively deconstruct something and describe the parts, but you can't state if it's good or bad and still be objective as those are subjective judgments.

There's no rule saying that they have to be objective as possible. Music reviews are based on what the reviewer "thought" of an album, which is an opinion, which is in turn subjective.

Look at any review. You'll see tons of subjectivity.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] There are two philosophies on subjectivity and objectivity. Too far? You were the one that jumped into my discussion. And desired outcome does not necessitate being an opinion. However, if I read your posts correctly....murder is good, genocide is good, assistance is bad, charity is bad. Because one can certainly skew your basis for good and evil to encompass those ideas.LJS9502_basic

You never stop putting words into people's mouths, do you? He never said those things. If you insist that he did, post quotes that show that he did say or imply that.

Morality is inherently subjective. It is based on value judgments. What one thinks is moral, another person might not. Not everyboddy thinks charity is a good thing.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] There are two philosophies on subjectivity and objectivity. Too far? You were the one that jumped into my discussion. And desired outcome does not necessitate being an opinion. However, if I read your posts correctly....murder is good, genocide is good, assistance is bad, charity is bad. Because one can certainly skew your basis for good and evil to encompass those ideas.LJS9502_basic

You never stop putting words into people's mouths, do you? He never said those things. If you insist that he did, post quotes that show that he did say or imply that.

Morality is inherently subjective. It is based on value judgments. What one thinks is moral, another person might not. Not everyboddy thinks charity is a good thing.

Not at all. He stated no opinion on the matter, so you can't attribute an opinion to him.

Just because I acknowledge that morality is not objective doesn't mean I think murder is not bad.

It would be a prepostorous non-sequitir to suggest that.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

You never stop putting words into people's mouths, do you? He never said those things. If you insist that he did, post quotes that show that he did say or imply that.

Morality is inherently subjective. It is based on value judgments. What one thinks is moral, another person might not. Not everyboddy thinks charity is a good thing.

Nibroc420

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

You never stop putting words into people's mouths, do you? He never said those things. If you insist that he did, post quotes that show that he did say or imply that.

Morality is inherently subjective. It is based on value judgments. What one thinks is moral, another person might not. Not everyboddy thinks charity is a good thing.

GreySeal9

Not at all. He stated no opinion on the matter, so you can't attribute an opinion to him.

Just because I acknowledge that morality is not objective doesn't mean I think murder is not bad.

It would be a prepostorous non-sequitir to suggest that.

And there is your double standard....and there your music argument falls apart. There is a set of standards in music. That is why it's taught. And practiced. And why some music is respected and some not. Because as a music society they have objective ideals.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]murder is good, genocide is good, assistance is bad, charity is bad. Because one can certainly skew your basis for good and evil to encompass those ideas.LJS9502_basic

I don't believe any of the opinions which you listed are invalid.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] They have to be as objective as possible. One can objectively look at music. It's possible that we don't agree on this because you don't do so. But then that would be personal. But to say people don't objectively deconstruct what they are listening to would be flat out wrong.LJS9502_basic

You can objectively deconstruct something and describe the parts, but you can't state if it's good or bad and still be objective as those are subjective judgments.

There's no rule saying that they have to be objective as possible. Music reviews are based on what the reviewer "thought" of an album, which is an opinion, which is in turn subjective.

Look at any review. You'll see tons of subjectivity.

First of all, that is just your opinion. There is no rule saying that.

Secondly, it's absurd. There are tons of reviews out there whose reviews are subjective, yet they are still critics that get paid for doing what they do.

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] If there is no objective good nor bad THAT is the outcome. You cannot have it both ways....that is double talking. And I don't fall for that.LJS9502_basic

] Can I make my stance any clearer?chrisPperson

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] If there is no objective good nor bad THAT is the outcome. You cannot have it both ways....that is double talking. And I don't fall for that.LJS9502_basic

I wasn't talking about him.LJS9502_basic

Yes, you were:

However, if I read your posts correctly....murder is good, genocide is good, assistance is bad, charity is bad.LJ

There is a record of everything we say, so I suggest you don't try to revise this thread's history.

And there is your double standard....and there your music argument falls apart. There is a set of standards in music. That is why it's taught. And practiced. And why some music is respected and some not. Because as a music society they have objective ideals.

LJ

How is it a double standard? Please explain. Should I add double standards to the list of terms you don't know the definition of?

The "standards of music" are subjective. Objectivism can only contain facts and standards are not facts by any definition.

Just beause something is taught and practiced doesn't make it objective. That is a non-sequitir.

Ideals can never be objective. Only facts.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"] No, Murder is bad because society has deemed it so. However there are those who think murder can be a good thing. It's still subjective, because it's not a fact.Nibroc420

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]I wasn't talking about him.GreySeal9

Yes, you were:

However, if I read your posts correctly....murder is good, genocide is good, assistance is bad, charity is bad.LJ

There is a record of everything we say, so I suggest you don't try to revise this thread's history.

And there is your double standard....and there your music argument falls apart. There is a set of standards in music. That is why it's taught. And practiced. And why some music is respected and some not. Because as a music society they have objective ideals.

LJ

How is it a double standard? Please explain.

The "standards of music" are subjective. Objectivism can only contain facts and standards are not facts by any definition.

Just beause something is taught and practiced doesn't make it objective. That is a non-sequitir.

Ideals can never be objective. Only facts.

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Then music has objective standards because society deemed it so.

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"] No, Murder is bad because society has deemed it so. However there are those who think murder can be a good thing. It's still subjective, because it's not a fact.chrisPperson

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]I wasn't talking about him.LJS9502_basic

Yes, you were:

However, if I read your posts correctly....murder is good, genocide is good, assistance is bad, charity is bad.LJ

There is a record of everything we say, so I suggest you don't try to revise this thread's history.

And there is your double standard....and there your music argument falls apart. There is a set of standards in music. That is why it's taught. And practiced. And why some music is respected and some not. Because as a music society they have objective ideals.

LJ

How is it a double standard? Please explain.

The "standards of music" are subjective. Objectivism can only contain facts and standards are not facts by any definition.

Just beause something is taught and practiced doesn't make it objective. That is a non-sequitir.

Ideals can never be objective. Only facts.

So, explain to me, how can a subjective statement be an objective statement as well. Explain how that works.

Also, it's better be scientific about it than to rely on links that are not peer-reviewed or cited and would never pass muster in any academic setting.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

How is it a double standard? Please explain.

The "standards of music" are subjective. Objectivism can only contain facts and standards are not facts by any definition.

Just beause something is taught and practiced doesn't make it objective. That is a non-sequitir.

Ideals can never be objective. Only facts.

GreySeal9

So, explain to me, how can a subjective statement be an objective statement as well. Explain how that works.

Also, it's better be scientific about it than to rely on links that are not peer-reviewed or cited and would never pass muster in any academic setting.

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Then music has objective standards because society deemed it so.

LJS9502_basic

The phrase "when its truth conditions are met and are mind-independent" means that it is meets the criteria for being a fact.

Facts, after all, have positive truth value and are certainly mind-independent.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]I think you are too hung up on making objective the opposite of subjective and in trying to make it scientific. It is not necessarily either.LJS9502_basic

So, explain to me, how can a subjective statement be an objective statement as well. Explain how that works.

Also, it's better be scientific about it than to rely on links that are not peer-reviewed or cited and would never pass muster in any academic setting.

Prove it.

And it philosophy is a science in that it is a discipline. That doesn't make it scientific.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="chrisPperson"] At what point does the opinion of the majority become fact?GreySeal9

The phrase "when its truth conditions are met and are mind-independent" means that it is meets the criteria for being a fact.

Facts, after all, have positive truth value and are certainly mind-independent.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="chrisPperson"] At what point does the opinion of the majority become fact?GreySeal9

The phrase "when its truth conditions are met and are mind-independent" means that it is meets the criteria for being a fact.

Facts, after all, have positive truth value and are certainly mind-independent.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Objective does not mean only fact. "Objectivity is both a central and elusive philosophical category. While there is no universally accepted articulation of objectivity, a proposition is generally considered to be objectively true when its truth conditions are met and are "mind-independent"-that is, not met by the judgment of a conscious entity or subject." That does not mention fact anywhere...Nibroc420

The phrase "when its truth conditions are met and are mind-independent" means that it is meets the criteria for being a fact.

Facts, after all, have positive truth value and are certainly mind-independent.

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

The phrase "when its truth conditions are met and are mind-independent" means that it is meets the criteria for being a fact.

Facts, after all, have positive truth value and are certainly mind-independent.

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Nibroc420"] +1 Objective : undistorted by emotion or personal bias; based on observable phenomena; "an objective appraisal"; "objective evidence" or emphasizing or expressing things as perceived without distortion of personal feelings, insertion of fictional matter, or interpretation;Nibroc420

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Philosophy...not dictionary.;)LJS9502_basic

Philosophies certain have opinions in them.

It is a "science" in that it is a discipline. It is not science in the way that the scientific method is science.

You are making the same mistake that creationists make when they deem evolution a theory in the colloquial sense.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Objective does not mean only fact. "Objectivity is both a central and elusive philosophical category. While there is no universally accepted articulation of objectivity, a proposition is generally considered to be objectively true when its truth conditions are met and are "mind-independent"-that is, not met by the judgment of a conscious entity or subject." That does not mention fact anywhere...LJS9502_basic

The phrase "when its truth conditions are met and are mind-independent" means that it is meets the criteria for being a fact.

Facts, after all, have positive truth value and are certainly mind-independent.

Philosophy is hardly unified.

Secondly, what is the difference?

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Nibroc420"] Facts, not opinions ;)

GreySeal9

Philosophies certain have opinions in them.

It is a "science" in that it is a discipline. It is not science in the way that the scientific method is science.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Philosophy is a science. Is science an opinion?LJS9502_basic

Philosophies certain have opinions in them.

It is a "science" in that it is a discipline. It is not science in the way that the scientific method is science.

I never said it wasn't. But that doesn't make it science in the way that the scientific method is science.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Philosophy is a science. Is science an opinion?LJS9502_basic

Philosophies certain have opinions in them.

It is a "science" in that it is a discipline. It is not science in the way that the scientific method is science.

You're getting kind of incoherent at this point.

Yes, music involves can involve objects, but judgments of "good" and "bad" are not objects. They are abstract opinions.

If I said, "this piece of music is bad," it is an opinion regardless of music being a discipline.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

Philosophies certain have opinions in them.

It is a "science" in that it is a discipline. It is not science in the way that the scientific method is science.

GreySeal9

You're getting kind of incoherent at this point.

Yes, music involves can involve objects, but judgments of "good" and "bad" are not objects. They are abstract opinions.

If I said, "this piece of music is bad," it is an opinion regardless of music being a discipline.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Music is also a discipline. As disciplines they have to follow certain rules and not be an opinion only discipline. There has to be object involved.

Nibroc420

You're getting kind of incoherent at this point.

Yes, music involves can involve objects, but judgments of "good" and "bad" are not objects. They are abstract opinions.

If I said, "this piece of music is bad," it is an opinion regardless of music being a discipline.

I think it has more to do with desperately not wanting to be wrong and thus just throwing stuff at the wall in the hope that it will stick.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Philosophy is a science. Is science an opinion?LJS9502_basic

Philosophies certain have opinions in them.

It is a "science" in that it is a discipline. It is not science in the way that the scientific method is science.

Here's a conclusion to a paper titles How Can We Objectively rank and rate Musicianship....

Conclusion Musicality is the greatest variable when evaluating music performance at the highest level. Most groups can achieve technically proficient performances. The value put on the demand of the literature being played, the context of the performance, and the expressive and stylistic qualities – the musicality – can make one performance better than another. Assessing musicality is ultimately an aesthetic judgment on the part of the evaluator and is at least partly intellectual and interpretative. By creating rating scales and systems that serve to enhance the understanding of the criteria for the evaluators and the participants in the assessment process, musicianship can be quantified fairly and objectively.

Here's a conclusion to a paper titles How Can We Objectively rank and rate Musicianship....

Conclusion Musicality is the greatest variable when evaluating music performance at the highest level. Most groups can achieve technically proficient performances. The value put on the demand of the literature being played, the context of the performance, and the expressive and stylistic qualities – the musicality – can make one performance better than another. Assessing musicality is ultimately an aesthetic judgment on the part of the evaluator and is at least partly intellectual and interpretative. By creating rating scales and systems that serve to enhance the understanding of the criteria for the evaluators and the participants in the assessment process, musicianship can be quantified fairly and objectively.

LJS9502_basic

A paper someone wrote.
Where they give their opinion on a topic.

Awesome, that MUST be objective :roll: