Opinions on the Internet. A complete waste of time?

KyussBishop · 27-09-2013 12:23AM

As pointless as a lot of online debates are in the end, I've developed interests in and learned a huge amount, about a lot of topics I wouldn't have spared a moments thought for otherwise.

Stubbornness, persistence, and a pedantic needling desire to get to the root of why certain viewpoints are so wrong, and to (often veeeery slowly) learn the best way of expressing that (often purely for refining my own thoughts - since some topics I can't express well no matter how much I learn), give me a perspective on some things that I'm pretty glad to have.

That kind of thought process also happens to be very useful with my work as well, which maybe helps explain the slightly obsessive aspect of it

As much as I dislike a lot of the opinions I end up arguing against, and find such debates tedious/frustrating to a large degree in how repetitive/intransigent they are - I have to say that I would not know nearly as much as I do about those topics, or have developed such an interest in them (particularly niche areas which only come up in highly irrational debate - which I've learned a lot from), if I hadn't wasted a lot of my time in those debates; they're a great way of cutting your teeth on facets of certain topics, and of forming your thoughts.

donegal__road · 27-09-2013 12:26AM

a few news topics in the last number of years, produced some of the more abusive and heated arguments I have seen on boards.ie.. and in some cases I wondered if some posters had vested interests in what was being debated..

The issues were, in no particular order..

Lisbon Treaty
Anglo Irish Bank bailout
Nama
General election
Syria

I do think it is possible to reach out and influence with your opinions on boards.ie, Politics.ie... but only if your opinions are well informed, you have manners and respect for other posters, and you don't try and talk down to people with legal jargon or excessively wordy posts.

boards.ie is an excellent facility and we are lucky to have it.

BillyMitchel · 27-09-2013 12:32AM

Cork24 wrote: »

So and your on boards for ?

The craic? Although its gone down hill recently.

bandit600 · 27-09-2013 01:16AM

Saves me time and effort when buying something or looking for an answer. A lot of people can write how they feel but not say it.Arsebook and others should scan posts before there posted to check for key words that might indicate bullying.

Dempsey · 27-09-2013 01:29AM

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

because the UN really makes a difference, it has about as much influence as the Pope asking for world peace at Christmas

my friends who regularly do un peacekeeping missions in war torn countries wouldnt agree with that

lovesfatgirls · 27-09-2013 03:20AM

just because you have an opinion doesn't mean its worth anything, so yeah probably a waste of time..but thats just like my opinion man

Savoir.Faire · 27-09-2013 09:36AM

It just strikes me as awful pointless at times.

Take for instance the atheist forum. I myself don't have any religious beliefs. Under normal circumstances I feel no need to share that information. I feel no need to lock myself into a darkened room with the curtains drawn and debate for hours on end about whether the angelus on TV impinges on my human rights. I just get on with life. What motivates a man (or woman) to waste hours, nay days, of their precious life spouting opinions online?

Mr. CooL ICE · 27-09-2013 09:55AM

Savoir.Faire wrote: »

It just strikes me as awful pointless at times.

Take for instance the atheist forum. I myself don't have any religious beliefs. Under normal circumstances I feel no need to share that information. I feel no need to lock myself into a darkened room with the curtains drawn and debate for hours on end about whether the angelus on TV impinges on my human rights. I just get on with life. What motivates a man (or woman) to waste hours, nay days, of their precious life spouting opinions online?

Why do anything? Sure, we're all going to die anyway

Sunglasses Ron · 27-09-2013 10:00AM

Savoir.Faire wrote: »

Opinions are everywhere on the Internet. Cranks firing out gibberish in the vain hope that someone will agree with them.

If it isn't a blog,......

I read a comment on the Daily Mail earlier regarding declining poll approval for Obama that went "just look at the multitude of new blogs appearing daily against him".

Yes. Because a blog written by a half retarded malcontent Tea Party Republican is a good call on how one of the best US presidents in history is doing. There should be a censorship law in line with IQ tests in truth.

27-09-2013 10:03AM

It is the internet so yes you do get a lot of raving nonsense, however if you pick the right forum you will be informed and nonsense is pulled up very quickly.

The problem I find is the entrenched lazy stereotyping on some issue, people are not looking for an informed debate on the issue they are looking for validation of their lazy stereotype.

The other thing that annoys me a bit ( on boards this is ) are posters who thank posts but very rarely offered an opinion themselves this is often because they are being very careful of how their internet footprint appears so they want validation for their opinions without personality owning up to them.

eamonnq · 27-09-2013 10:10AM

We never give opinions and we never state views
After all, you can't be sure that what we say is true
And if you want to join us, you can follow on behind us
You can talk about your visions
You can make some big decisions

Savoir.Faire · 27-09-2013 10:14AM

Sunglasses Ron wrote: »

I read a comment on the Daily Mail earlier regarding declining poll approval for Obama that went "just look at the multitude of new blogs appearing daily against him".

Yes. Because a blog written by a half retarded malcontent Tea Party Republican is a good call on how one of the best US presidents in history is doing. There should be a censorship law in line with IQ tests in truth.

I'm not so sure a person who believes Obama is the best president the US has had would fare out too well in an IQ test.

TwoShedsJackson · 27-09-2013 10:44AM

Nothing wrong with debating, as long as you're not expecting to actually change anyone's mind.

Sunglasses Ron · 27-09-2013 11:00AM

Savoir.Faire wrote: »

I'm not so sure a person who believes Obama is the best president the US has had would fare out too well in an IQ test.

Apart from his possibly ill advised wading into the Syria crisis, can you name one major flaw of his presidency? One broken promise that was not the fault of the Republicans?

He has pulled out of Iraq, is attempting an exit strategy from Afghanistan, and has brought the unemployment rate to the pre GFC percentage.

If you can name me one major **** up he has overseen or lie he has told I would love to hear it. While I am not aiming this specifically at you at all, generally speaking Obama critics, be they American or foreign, tend not to be the sharpest knives in the drawer.

Filibuster · 27-09-2013 11:10AM

Sunglasses Ron wrote: »

Apart from his possibly ill advised wading into the Syria crisis, can you name one major flaw of his presidency? One broken promise that was not the fault of the Republicans?

He has pulled out of Iraq, is attempting an exit strategy from Afghanistan, and has brought the unemployment rate to the pre GFC percentage.

If you can name me one major **** up he has overseen or lie he has told I would love to hear it. While I am not aiming this specifically at you at all, generally speaking Obama critics, be they American or foreign, tend not to be the sharpest knives in the drawer.

Obama wanted to stay in Iraq, but was told to fcuk off by the Iraqi government. He wanted to prolong the US involvement.

His biggest lie, was saying he would have the most transparent government ever, but yet conducted most dealings behind closed doors. Then spied on every citizen in America.

Also not only did he not close Gitmo, but he introduced indefinite detention without trial for US citizens.

He also forced through an unpopular healthcare plan that most Americans did not want.

I don't like Obama, but I won't be able to change your opinion on him :P

Sunglasses Ron · 27-09-2013 11:16AM

Filibuster wrote: »

Obama wanted to stay in Iraq, but was told to fcuk off by the Iraqi government. He wanted to prolong the US involvement.

His biggest lie, was saying he would have the most transparent government ever, but yet conducted most dealings behind closed doors. Then spied on every citizen in America.

Also not only did he not close Gitmo, but he introduced indefinite detention without trial for US citizens.

He also forced through an unpopular healthcare plan that most Americans did not want.

I don't like Obama, but I won't be able to change your opinion on him :P

Damn right you won't. The above gave me head cancer. If people are too slow witted to realise Edward Snowden's "revelations" relate to programmes in operation from at least the Clinton era that were already common, if unconfirmed, knowledge, I have no further words. Keep tuned to Alex Jones lads :pac:

Legs.Eleven · 27-09-2013 11:25AM

There was a bit of a discussion in Humanities about the Yugoslav Wars there recently and I was up till 4am last night reading about it, which got me reading about The Cold War and all that entailed (Vietnam War, Korean War, Cuban Missile Crisis, the formation of the Eastern Bloc etc.). I now know a respectable amount on the two topics. That's happened a fair bit on here: discussion has ignited my interest in a lot of things I probably wouldn't have bothered reading about otherwise.

I can be an awful know-it-all on here sometimes but the reality is, I know very little. That's something I've personally learned since posting on here in my current guise and my previous one.

I still find it very difficult to admit I'm wrong though. :cool:

pundy · 27-09-2013 11:39AM

opinions on boards are a waste of time usually, as the irish people are inclined to be stuck in their ways and too stubborn to back down from any sort of ridiculous argument - even when they know they are wrong.

Insect Overlord · 27-09-2013 11:41AM

pundy wrote: »

opinions on boards are a waste of time usually, as the irish people are inclined to be stuck in their ways and too stubborn to back down from any sort of ridiculous argument - even when they know they are wrong.

I disagree! :mad:

:pac:

Legs.Eleven · 27-09-2013 11:43AM

pundy wrote: »

opinions on boards are a waste of time usually, as the irish people are inclined to be stuck in their ways and too stubborn to back down from any sort of ridiculous argument - even when they know they are wrong.

I've been unwilling to back down sometimes but in my heart of hearts, I know I've been wrong. People might not show they've had their opinions changed because of pride but that doesn't mean they haven't gone off and thought about it.

Muise... · 27-09-2013 11:56AM

Legs.Eleven wrote: »

I've been unwilling to back down sometimes but in my heart of hearts, I know I've been wrong. People might not show they've had their opinions changed because of pride but that doesn't mean they haven't gone off and thought about it.

I'd be more ashamed of sticking to my guns in a war against information and reason, tbh.

I think people are afraid of looking stupid if they don't know something (which is stupid) -but you're not stupid if you don't know something - you're only stupid if you don't ask.

Ush1 · 27-09-2013 12:19PM

Sunglasses Ron wrote: »

Apart from his possibly ill advised wading into the Syria crisis, can you name one major flaw of his presidency? One broken promise that was not the fault of the Republicans?

He has pulled out of Iraq, is attempting an exit strategy from Afghanistan, and has brought the unemployment rate to the pre GFC percentage.

If you can name me one major **** up he has overseen or lie he has told I would love to hear it. While I am not aiming this specifically at you at all, generally speaking Obama critics, be they American or foreign, tend not to be the sharpest knives in the drawer.

http://www.policymic.com/articles/16949/predator-drone-strikes-50-civilians-are-killed-for-every-1-terrorist-and-the-cia-only-wants-to-up-drone-warfare

Probably not a discussion for this thread though.

Muise... · 27-09-2013 12:25PM

Aguafrio wrote: »

Wise words, I think people need to realise it's ok to be wrong.

Metaphysician, know thyself. :P

(if you know you are wrong, surely you have just been put right, and are therefore no longer wrong? Carry on.)

KyussBishop · 27-09-2013 12:55PM

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

Nothing wrong with debating, as long as you're not expecting to actually change anyone's mind.

The problem more often though, is when someone is unable to admit they are wrong about something, and doggedly refuses to engage in logical argument on it, while continuing to push that view (not so much of a problem, if the poster stops pushing that particular view).

On so many topics, you see rhetorical argument used instead of logical argument - and one of the big recurring hallmarks of someone trying to bullshít their way through an argument with rhetoric, is persistent condescension/snark (usually you will find, they are trying to win ground on a point, based on image not on logic); when you see that from a poster, it's good grounds to be extremely suspicious of their views/motives in argument.

Problem with that is: It is successful/effective in smearing logical argument in a lot of cases, just because of how it muddies debate so much. It's used as a subtle form of trolling a lot (and is a key method of trying to obscure fallacious arguments), and there is no possible rule you can make to remove that from a forum.

When I see that style of posting from someone, it's a reliable indicator of deceptive argument, and (since it's not a very nice/pleasant way to argue) often motivates me to learn more about the topic just to pull them out on being a díck in the first place

Muise... wrote: »

I'd be more ashamed of sticking to my guns in a war against information and reason, tbh.

I think people are afraid of looking stupid if they don't know something (which is stupid) -but you're not stupid if you don't know something - you're only stupid if you don't ask.

Problem here is (and this is the other side of being unable to admit when wrong): If you're debating with people trying to push their views based on rhetoric/image, then you give them grounds to take your admission of fault in one part of your argument, and use it to try and discredit the wider argument (even though doing that is fallacious, it still lets them discredit based on image)

Sometimes I have to 'wing-it' a bit, if I'm debating a topic I'm still learning about - there may be a fault in a small/specific argument I make, that a person is using to try and discredit a wider argument, but I will defer away from that until I learn more about the topic (it's a good way of learning actually).

So long as you learn from it and don't persist with the same flawed argument, it's not so bad

If I can trust that the person I am debating with is not engaging in rhetorical argument though, then there isn't this problem and I just admit the fault.

Sometimes people throw in a bit of condescension and the like in order to bolster actual valid points, and are not engaging in rhetorical argument, but they shouldn't do this really (even though there is no rule against it), as it is really just trying to intimidate other posters, and it leads to (valid) suspicion of a persons motives in argument, and leads to defenses going up, which makes logical debate more difficult.

old hippy · 27-09-2013 01:02PM

I'm with Charlie Brooker on the whole thing

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2006/jun/02/comment.charliebrooker

"There's no point debating anything online. You might as well hurl shoes in the air to knock clouds from the sky. The internet's perfect for all manner of things, but productive discussion ain't one of them. It provides scant room for debate and infinite opportunities for fruitless point-scoring: the heady combination of perceived anonymity, gestated responses, random heckling and a notional "live audience" quickly conspire to create a "perfect storm" of perpetual bickering."

Duckjob · 27-09-2013 01:04PM

It's critically important to correct anyone who is wrong on the internet.

DeVore · 27-09-2013 01:06PM

You will change peoples opinion with a well written, cogent post.

It just probably wont be the person you are debating with.

Boards has a "reader" to "poster" ratio which is quite high. You never know the impact your post might have had on many others.

Btw, if we cant have a fruitful debate/discussion online... what exactly have we been doing on this thread?

</thread>

Muise... · 27-09-2013 01:11PM

KyussBishop wrote: »

Problem here is (and this is the other side of being unable to admit when wrong): If you're debating with people trying to push their views based on rhetoric/image, then you give them grounds to take your admission of fault in one part of your argument, and use it to try and discredit the wider argument (even though doing that is fallacious, it still lets them discredit based on image)

this is usually the point when I remember that it doesn't really matter, not when the grounds they are gaining are actually a minefield. I stay up on my cloud and giggle at them.

Earthhorse · 27-09-2013 01:27PM

A lot of online debating, just like a lot of real life debating, is a waste of time. There are far too many people out there concerned with being right rather than seeking truth. But to say it's a complete waste of time is obviously fallacious. I've changed people's minds and had my mind changed by online debate (not to mention debate is only one part of why the internet is useful and seems to be the focus of the OP and thread whereas the title doesn't mention it specifically).

Legs.Eleven · 27-09-2013 01:30PM

I'd be more ashamed of sticking to my guns in a war against information and reason, tbh.

I wouldn't so much stick to my guns as do a legger! :cool:

I think people are afraid of looking stupid if they don't know something (which is stupid) -but you're not stupid if you don't know something - you're only stupid if you don't ask.

I think my problem arises when the person you disagree with on a fundamental level (which is usually the kinds of discussions I get into; people who have extreme opinions on certain things) knows more than you with regards to facts and figures. It's difficult to argue against that with anecdotal experience alone . Sometimes my own views have been altered to some degree but I still won't admit that to a person whose opinions are completely contrary to my own and I certainly wouldn't be asking them for more information on it which is down to pride ( but I have logged off Boards and thought a bit more about it. Certain points of my opinions have been changed on here but rarely the fundamentals.

Opinions on the Internet. A complete waste of time?

Comments