Opinions can be wrong

--------------Definition of Opinion------------- An opinion is a comparison or a measurement based on one or more Qualia. This is not a definition you will find in the dictionary, but I will present reasons as to why it is the most useful definition for our philosophical debate. Qualia are individual instances of subjective, conscious, experience [1]. This definition is difficult to figure out, so here is a description of what that means: "The 'what it's like' character of mental states. The way it feels to have mental states such as pain, seeing red, smelling a rose, etc. " [2] Qualia is by definition, subjective. Our senses are all pretty much the same, but we all experience things in different ways. For example, whenever I hear a particular sound effect that I have heard in the past, when I hear it again the way it feels is tinted by the past experience. ----------------The nature of disagreements----------- There are only two ways, in my thinking, that humans can disagree with anything. The first is through different sets of information. To take the game of mafia [3] for example, each person knows what their role card is and argues that they are not mafia. A cop with a guilty result will try to convince people that the accused is mafia, and since other people don't know for certain whether the cop is lying or not, a disagreement occurs. A disagreement about this is not about opinion. To illustrate my point, let's say a student needs to measure the distance between two planets based on some given information and a formula for practice, but she makes a mistake and finds the faulty answer of 6.7 light years. The student says, "I think the distance between these two planets are 6.7 light years. " This is not an opinion at all. If the student would have gotten the formula right, this would be a true fact. It does not become a entirely different statement just because the student got the formula wrong. Therefore, this is a false fact, and not an opinion. This is indeed the subject's judgement, but the statement is an entirely about facts which makes it not an opinion. The second kind of disagreement is not rooted in fact, but in Qualia. These are about premises that are entirely unrelated to fact. For example, take the Quale of how cookies taste, and compare it to the Quale of how brownies taste. I would say that brownies are better than the chocolate cookies from Walmart. Someone may disagree with me and say that the cookies are totally better than brownies, and that would be totally fine. This can be considered opinions, as opinions are the opposite of facts and these are very clearly not facts. These are totally different, and it makes sense to make a difference between them. Reject any definitions that allow for opinions to be of the first type of disagreement, because there would be no subjectivity without Qualia. Subjectivity is existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought[4]. Opinion is just about differing ideas about an object, but there is no differing ideas in a purely factual realm where all the facts are known. --------------Conclusions-------------- Opinions cannot be objectively wrong. What I experience is different than what you experience given the same stimulus. Thus the resolution is negated. The stuff about the two types of disagreement is entirely original thought, and I challenge my opponent to find holes in my way of thinking so I can improve it. 1. . https://en.wikipedia.org... 2. . https://sites.google.com... 3. . http://www.debate.org... 4. . http://www.dictionary.com...