All opinions are equal

My opponent's opening argument: --"What my oponent has failed to understand is that everyone has had some kind of education or expeience. " -- Not only do I understand this, it is paramount to the overall point I am trying to make. The varying degrees of education and experience of an individual, is exactly what justifies being critical of their opinion and ascribing a value to it. --"Different people have different experiences which is why each opinion must be considered, and every opinion is equal"-- My opponent is correct that because opinions are varied due to the many experiences of others that society should consider them all. However the former part of the sentence doesn't allow the latter to follow. Knowing every opinion should be considered doesn't mean they are all equal. It simply means that no society should silence them. My opponent concludes his first argument saying that believing all opinions are equal facilitates diversity of opinion thus creating a better society. My opponent and I agree that diversity of opinion is important for society. As I said just above though, freedom of speech creates this diversity, and allows us to freely gauge and evaluate any opinion without the fear that there are opinions we aren't privy too. In my opponent's second argument he once again brings up his first argument. --"Secondly having a right to an opinion does make all opinions equal"-- I am now forced to ask my opponent once again, does the lack of the ‘right' to an opinion make it unequal? As we know there are places where an opinion is not a ‘right'. The ‘right' to an opinion, is simply another way of saying ‘freedom of speech'. My opponent attempts to explain why a ‘right' to an opinion makes all opinions equal: --"Because of the fact that everyone has opinions it makes them equal because like I said above everyone has had different experiences in their life"— My opponent follows this by contrasting the experiences of a university student and someone with ‘street smarts'. The fact that my opponent is differentiating between the types of experiences makes it seem as though he believes that different experiences lead to a preference of opinion, and thus a difference in value. We would agree on this then as I would certainly require the advice of the ‘street smart' individual over the ‘university student' if I should walk out my front door. Thus both my opponent and I apparently agree that placing a value on an opinion is a prudent thing to do. My opponent's third argument is a concession in regards to experience. My opponent begins: --"Thirdly I wouldn't take the opinion of the person who has more experience"-- However, he then follows by saying he would specifically take the advice of someone with experience: --"If somebody had had a heart attack in the past,and I told them my experience and symptoms they might diagnose it,but a doctor might not"-- I will concede to my opponent that a doctor might be wrong. But ultimately what my opponent is saying here is that he prefers the opinion of someone with experience, the experience of having a heart attack. Thus placing a higher value on their opinion. My opponent concludes: --"Therefore, the person with more experience doesn't have better opinions"-- I believe what has been established is that my opponent prefers an opinion from experience rather than from expertise. Clearly showing that either experience or education can be used to properly gauge the value of all opinions. My opponent concludes by continuing the argument regarding Einstein. My opponent continues to make the case that we shouldn't dismiss people who aren't educated because they might be correct in the end. He uses Einstein as an example of this. He states: --"He may have gotten a degree in the end,but he didn' do well with education in the beginning"— Einstein may be notorious for his educational failings, (had to drop out of high school, failed entrance exam to school of choice) it had little bearing on the criticism his theories faced. --"My opponent even admitted that it had very little to do with his education as to whether his opinions were accepted"-- I did not in fact admit to this. I submitted that his education had very little to do with why his opinions were **rejected**. If Einstein were uneducated it would be reasonable to be critical of, and even reject, his theories. My opponent concludes: --"Therefore,Einstein showed that education doesn' matter. " -- My opponent and I agree with this statement, it does not however advance his argument. It is a shame that in the case of Einstein, education doesn't matter, for if it did the world would be a lot better off. Instead what seemed to matter, and the reason for criticism, has nothing to do with education, and rather things that have nothing to do with Einstein's credibility as a scientist. If anything, Einstein shows that education does matter, and that his opinions were all the more valuable (and credible) because of it. My opponent makes the case that the opinion of the uneducated must be valued the same as the educated, and points to Einstein as an example of the uneducated opinion becoming the mainstream one. I emphatically challenge my opponent to show that there was indeed actual criticism of Einstein that was directed at his education, and not simply a ruse to legitimize prejudice. I would like to present some example of that evidence here. A simple Google search of ‘einstein lack of education' reveals the following FIRST result: . http://www.biblebelievers.org.au... [1] I am making no judgment of the author nor to quality of the website presenting this. I will merely share portions of it as to allow my opponent and voters to judge for themselves as to the ‘value' of this opinion. "Albert Einstein: Was he a thief, a liar and a plagiarist? ": "Einstein was an inept and moronic person, who could not even tie his own shoelaces" "He contributed NOTHING ORIGINAL" "He stole the ideas of others, and the Jew-controlled media made him a 'hero. '" "Einstein's education, or lack thereof, is an important part of this story" "Einstein failed a simple entrance exam to an engineering school in Zurich" "This exam consisted mainly of mathematical problems, and Einstein showed himself to be mathematically inept in this exam" (This is verifiably untrue. Though Einstein did fail the exam "he got exceptional marks in mathematics and physics") (Thus value/credibility of this opinion is reasonably in doubt) [2][3] "Because of this push by the Jewish media, 1922, Einstein received the Nobel prize…" "He immediately began his work as a tool for World Zionism" "His death was just the beginning of his usage and exploitation by World Jewry. " "The Jewish-controlled media continued to promote the myth of this Super-Jew" "Jews cannot allow the due credit to go to William Shockley because he spent the majority of his scientific career demonstrating the genetic and mental inferiority of non-whites and arguing for their sterilization. " "The Jews could not let any of the truly great geniuses of our time be recognized" And it goes on… Needless to say, I believe some opinions are more valuable than others. Without even knowing anything about the author, I can tell his opinion is worth being critical of with regards to this subject. Once again I challenge my opponent to provide legitimate criticism of Einstein's education. Finally, I would like to apologize to my opponent as I have become aware that in the previous two rounds I had been mistakenly referring to him as female. I accept any loss of conduct points should the voters find it necessary. [1] . http://www.biblebelievers.org.au... [2] Highfield, Roger; Carter, Paul (1993), The Private Lives of Albert Einstein, London: Faber and Faber, p. 21, ISBN 0-571-17170-2 [3] . http://en.wikipedia.org...