opinions can be wrong

--------Burden of Proof--------- This part of my opponent's argument is flat out incorrect. Read the resolution again. All I need to do is to prove that opinions can't be wrong, not that they are always right. My position is that no opinion can be right or wrong, which negates the resolution. -------Definition of Opinion------- My opponent gives a Merriam-Websters definition that is suitable for everyday use. However, to be useful to our philosophical debate, it must be narrowed down. As I argued before, you should reject any definition that allows opinions to be unrelated to Qualia, which I will go over in the next point. The reason you should prefer my view on the definion of opinion over my opponent's, is because he dropped my argument about why alternate definitions don't work. And it would be unfair to present a new argument in the last round, so my opponent has no chance of winning the definition debate, which means that the debate must be evaluated under my definition. -----------Qualia----------- Qualia only includes subjective perception, which means that opinions (as per my definition) cannot be about anything objective. If they are, opinion is a misnomer as it is not an opinion. Because of this, Qualia doesn't backfire on me at all. Take Pro's faulty example. "A mouse is bigger than an elephant." This is not an opinion as it involves objective measurement. A person that states this is just stating an incorrect fact. A real opinion, like "My music sounds better than that crap," is an opinion because what sounds better is up to each person's subjective perception (Qualia). Real opinions cannot be contridicted, as it is just how a person percieves things. I want to stress here that beliefs are not always opinions. There are facts out there, like "God exists" which pretty much no one knows for 100% certain whether it is true or false. That is not a opinion. It cant be a fact just because no one knows if it is true or not. The presidential polls argument is nonsensical and does not link to his conclusion. Of course it works, because you are objectively counting subjective opinions, the same subjective opinions that is counted when people vote. I am just talking about comparing opinions in the sense that you can place one as right while another is wrong. ---------Perception of the Painted House--------- Sight is Qualia. The brain interprets signals in different ways, by recognizing objects[1]. A house is an object that most people recognize. However, this, again, is Qualia. If a person has never seen a house before and doesn't recognize it, that doesn't mean her perception of it is wrong. What a house is is slightly different for everybody, and so its not like your eyes are malfunctioning if you don't see something that others do, or vise versa. ---------Why I have won this debate--------- Let's recap. My case: Opinions, which are descriptions of Qualia and the conclusions and comparisons drawn from them, cannot be right or wrong. Qualia are just subjective perceptions of the world, which is different for each person. This definition should be preferred because without Qualia, you can explain everything objectively and factually. My opponents case: An opinion is a belief, judgment, or way of thinking about something. The example "In my opinion Eggs are bigger than full-grown turkeys" and a bunch of others prove that opinions can be wrong. My opponent loses because he dropped my argument as to why my definition should be preferred and did not present any reasons why we should accept his definition. Furthermore, it is obvious that under my definition, my opponent's examples are all either not really opinions or don't affirm the resolution. The resolution is negated. Vote Con. 1. http://www.iep.utm.edu...