Speaking on absolutes

[OzyWho]

Do you agree with this viewpoint?:


Speaking only in absolutes is undeniably the best way to communicate.

But to be serious, there's a benefit to having people express themselves in a way that reflects the confidence they have in their views. You might point out that true certainty is impossible, but this is precisely why I don't think that we should preface every opinion we have with "in my opinion". Of course it's my opinion, that's why I said it.


Myself, when I see someone always talking in absolutes on a topic - I'm skeptical wether their level of certainty would even allow for a honest debate or discussion.

[Bruno]

there is no honest debate or discussion when it comes to pedophilia

[SuperJack]

there is no honest debate or discussion when it comes to pedophilia

Bruno's favourite toppic one again

[Marshmallow Marshall]

To remain on topic...

I agree that "in my opinion" is overused. I only use it when I want to temperate what I just said because it really needs to be, or when the context could imply I'd be speaking something that isn't my opinion.
As for "speaking with the confidence you have in your views", that's absolutely true. The issue is most people (probably myself included) have too "absolute" opinions that lack nuance. Voicing them with the proportional level of certainity then becomes pointless in a logical discussion, because what those people are doing is akin to preaching a specific dogma. Of course, there are times when the truth is obvious and can be stated with certainity, but those times are less common than you'd think. As an example, just think of the following sentence: "It's obvious the Sun revolves around the Earth. Just look at the sky." Obviously, this is not valid anymore in modern times (excluding flat earthers such as Distorted :)), but in the Middle Ages, it would have been easy to state that as an obvious truth.

To sum my views up, I'd say I agree with the author of the quote, but have to say it lacks nuance due to the fact it doesn't consider that most people lack nuance and that what may seen obviously true now may not actually be true.

[Bruno]

Bruno's favourite toppic one again

he's clearly referring to apo's thread he got shit all over in.

what is your problem with me? why are you riding my dick? you comment on nearly every thread i make or reply to just so you can try and start beef with me.


what the fuck is your issue?

[Marshmallow Marshall]

he's clearly referring to apo's thread he got shit all over in.

what is your problem with me? why are you riding my dick? you comment on nearly every thread i make or reply to just so you can try and start beef with me.


what the fuck is your issue?

Without wanting to speak in his place... maybe he sees every post you make is an attempt to stir up some drama, so he hops in the trolling? That sounds reasonable.

[Bruno]

Without wanting to speak in his place... maybe he sees every post you make is an attempt to stir up some drama, so he hops in the trolling? That sounds reasonable.

that's his problem, not mine. i dont give a fuck what he perceives my posts as. i aint talkin to his bitch ass literally ever, yet he deems it necessary to constantly try and get my attention like a nagging child. its getting old. personal attacks are against the rules, but harassment/obsession isn't. wild.

[Marshmallow Marshall]

Be careful what you say... you wouldn't want him going berserk, would you? He's a viking.

edit: sorry im probably slightly derailing the thread, please consider replying to my more serious and on-topic post, dear reader

[Bruno]

Be careful what you say... you wouldn't want him going berserk, would you? He's a viking.

i guarantee if somebody comments in half the threads u do just to say some dumb shit to or about you and not even contribute to the topic of the thread, youd instantly be infracting them for something

[SuperJack]

I take every tasty opportunity to go after MM's french ass. Not my fault he surrenders everything.

[SuperJack]

Without wanting to speak in his place... maybe he sees every post you make is an attempt to stir up some drama, so he hops in the trolling? That sounds reasonable.

Shuuush you can't just reveal my intention! One may of just been annoyed that Ozy tried to take out and make a different topic yet Bruno just tried and twisted if back to a more drama enducing topic.

[Apocist]

Apo believes that it is situational and there are no absolutes in this universe. Using the absolutes can sometimes lead to sounding quite arrogant and having a view point belittled as well. Confidence shown is great and all, but there's all kinds of ways of doing it.


Without wanting to speak in his place... maybe he sees every post you make is an attempt to stir up some drama, so he hops in the trolling? That sounds reasonable.

With Apo's last comment on it, the best way they've handled it is ignore trolls where possible. Obsessions with pedophilia will only lead to trouble. Such as this thread also getting intentionally destroyed.

[OzyWho]

he's clearly referring to apo's thread he got shit all over in.

what is your problem with me? why are you riding my dick? you comment on nearly every thread i make or reply to just so you can try and start beef with me.


what the fuck is your issue?

This quote is taken from a discussion I had with somebody regarding the London System in Chess.
Get your confirmation bias in check, don't put words in my mouth and don't presume my intentions. If you want to know my intentions just ask.
This topic is about nothing more nor less than what it appears.

[rumox]

I think whoever you are talking to should have just said speak confidently because always speaking in absolutes is retarded and is basically the foundation of the cringiest cunts out there, ideologues.

[rumox]

Don't get me wrong, absolution speak is fine at times. If you know without a doubt what you are talking about then do say stuff like "you do x to get y" and not "i think you do x to get y". This is why leaders are leaders, they are very valuable. The problem is morons think they can be leaders and take up the mantle.

[rumox]

Also, only a sith deals in absolutes.

[FrostByte]

Do you agree with this viewpoint?:


Myself, when I see someone always talking in absolutes on a topic - I'm skeptical about whether their level of certainty would even allow for a honest debate or discussion.

Speaking in absolutes generally means the person is overconfident. If someone knows "absolute truth" they probably don't understand the term "absolute truth". Or they're scum and they have TMI. Either way, overconfident people are usually easily rekt in a rational debate because they're making an assumption somewhere that is a stretch. When someone is absolutely confident in something I'm usually skeptical of their grasp on the subject. Humility is important to me.

Having said that, there are a few exceptions. If someone is willing to admit that their "absolute truth" is faith based then I usually don't fault them for it unless their faith based assumption leads to other people having their rights eroded. If operating under a faith based assumption makes someone's life easier then who am I to judge? We can't possibly know with any certainty what happens after we die so I can't confident argue against anyone's religious view in that particular regard.

It's OK to speak against pedophilia in absolute terms, though. Not sure if this is actually about that but it's a good example to the contrary.

[rumox]

Also I wonder how much of a diehard this person is on this matter. Would he be the type of person to make a mountain out of a mole hill? Reading your quote lowkey screams aspergers to me lol

[oops_ur_dead]

I actually pretty much agree with that quote in the OP. Very few things in the universe (if any at all) are objectively and unequivocally true for everyone. Using so-called "absolutes" to refer to things is a shorthand for expressing an opinion or an uncertain conclusion where speaking more precisely would be overly verbose.

Even things such as the existence of gravity are not absolute, so to speak. Perhaps chance thermodynamic fluctuations have so consistently applied forces throughout the history of the universe such that gravity seems to exist when really it's an illusion. The chances of that happening are exceedingly small, but not zero. But, nobody goes around saying that gravity "probably" exists.

The only things that comes to mind that actually are absolute are that liking drawn child pornography and being attracted to children makes you a pedophile.

[Oberon]

Do you agree with this viewpoint?:


Myself, when I see someone always talking in absolutes on a topic - I'm skeptical wether their level of certainty would even allow for a honest debate or discussion.
I agree with what you said completely. To me that sounds like someone who is insecure and afraid that allowing the ‘other side’ any points is a sign of weakness lol.

[Oberon]

Don't get me wrong, absolution speak is fine at times. If you know without a doubt what you are talking about then do say stuff like "you do x to get y" and not "i think you do x to get y". This is why leaders are leaders, they are very valuable. The problem is morons think they can be leaders and take up the mantle.
+1

[Oberon]

I take every tasty opportunity to go after MM's french ass. Not my fault he surrenders everything.
Can I join? You’ve had the hundred years war and plenty of times to go at it, let others join in on the fun :P

[FrostByte]

I agree with what you said completely. To me that sounds like someone who is insecure and afraid that allowing the ‘other side’ any points is a sign of weakness lol.

From one anxiety guy to another; you are insecure and there's nothing wrong with expressing that. Anyone who shit talks you for it should jump off a bridge over a frozen river

[Oberon]

Heh thanks for the support. Yeah on my good days im not too worried about it. I suppose in this case its more a matter of manifestation rather than the anxiety itself being the problem.

[OzyWho]

I'm sorry to necro this, but I have to get this out of the way:

oops_ur_dead
You were the only one agreeing with the quote. Yet, at the same time, you yourself prefaced your post with "I pretty much agree" - which in my opinion isn't speaking in absolutes, as it appears to leave wiggle room for an opinion to change.
When I point out this contradiction, do you still agree with the quote? (or was this actually not a contradiction?)

FrostByte
You were the only (out of those who stayed on topic) who didn't preface his post with something like: In my opinion
I believe
I think
I agree/disagree
When I point out this contradiction, do you still disagree with the quote? (or was this actually not a contradiction?)

Also, don't you guys feel like having a discussion with someone is pointless when you see them talking in absolutes only? :S

[FrostByte]

I'm sorry to necro this, but I have to get this out of the way:

oops_ur_dead
You were the only one agreeing with the quote. Yet, at the same time, you yourself prefaced your post with "I pretty much agree" - which in my opinion isn't speaking in absolutes, as it appears to leave wiggle room for an opinion to change.
When I point out this contradiction, do you still agree with the quote? (or was this actually not a contradiction?)

FrostByte
You were the only (out of those who stayed on topic) who didn't preface his post with something like: In my opinion
I believe
I think
I agree/disagree
When I point out this contradiction, do you still disagree with the quote? (or was this actually not a contradiction?)

Also, don't you guys feel like having a discussion with someone is pointless when you see them talking in absolutes only? :S

I don't need to always say "in my opinion" for it to be implied that it's just my opinion. It's not my job to handhold people and illustrate fact vs opinion.

[oops_ur_dead]

I don't need to always say "in my opinion" for it to be implied that it's just my opinion. It's not my job to handhold people and illustrate fact vs opinion.

Isn't that exactly what the original quote was saying though? Why did you disagree with it then?

I agree with the quote but the guy sounds like kind of a dork. That's why I said "pretty much".

[Helz]

Do you agree with this viewpoint?:


Myself, when I see someone always talking in absolutes on a topic - I'm skeptical wether their level of certainty would even allow for a honest debate or discussion.

I like the 'over use' of 'in my opinion.' To me its less about what your communicating to someone else as it is acknowledging the position you are speaking from. I generally make an attempt to acknowledge my ignorance as often as I can and I hold positions voiced within that frame from others in higher regard.

I kinda connect this concept to the idea of a dilettante. One of my favorite bits about Einstein was how he would explain concepts with geometry. One day he illustrated how if you consider the volume of an individuals knowledge as the area of a circle and ignorance being everything outside of it the perimeter (which could be seen as the understanding of what we don't know) the relationship between the radius and the perimeter is exponential. That is to say- our understanding of our ignorance increases at a higher rate than our understanding of what we know. The Dunning Kruger effect draws this out beautifully for those interested and I personally attribute this pattern to the statement 'The understanding of your ignorance is the beginning of wisdom.'
Going back to the dilettante they do not understand how little they know and over anticipate their understanding of a subject. These people leverage their opinions as facts and speak in absolutes.

I do like your point about being skeptical if someone can hold a genuine conversation if they speak in absolutes. Its a pretty hairy situation to point out someone's ignorance when they are not humble enough to handle it.

[Oberon]

People who speak in absolutes are retards. End of story.