NationStates Jolt Archive


Moral solicitation.

Sydenia
25-08-2004, 10:17
Am I the only person who finds that you can't express an opinion anymore without someone trying to change your mind? I'm not just referring to Nationstates, or even the online world exclusively - though it's certainly more predominant there. And I'm not exactly innocent in this matter either, but that's another post.

I seem to recall a time when I could express an opinion, and if someone disagreed with it, that was that. There was no fight to convert me to their point of view, nor vice-versa. We simply agreed to disagree.

Nowadays there seems to be a much stronger push towards trying to prove opposing opinions wrong. What's more, if you don't want to listen to the other person's opinion (or even in some cases not accept it), you are closeminded or ignorant.

Now, I like to think myself fairly opeminded. My morals aren't set in stone, and I consider many possibilities before deciding one any of them. But that doesn't mean I'm open for what I call 'moral solicitation'.

We'll assume I'm pliable in my choice of, say... coffee brand. That (to me) doesn't inherently suggest that I want every person who likes a different brand of coffee to come up to me and try to sell me on their preferred brand.

It's true I may be willing to change my brand of coffee; but if I do so, it will be because I find my current brand lacking. I will make the decision of my volition, based on the criteria I choose.

In short, I don't want to be deluged in differing opinions. If I'm interested in your viewpoint on a given subject, I'll ask. If I feel that my beliefs no longer suit me, I'll seek out other ideas. People trying to sell me their ideas without caring if I have any interest in changing mine is, in my mind, as annoying as door-to-door salesmen who take it upon themselves to try to sell me a new vacuum when I'm fine with the one I have.

Is there really something wrong with that?
Slack Baby
25-08-2004, 10:27
[QUOTE=Sydenia] People trying to sell me their ideas without caring if I have any interest in changing mine is, in my mind, as annoying as door-to-door salesmen who take it upon themselves to try to sell me a new vacuum when I'm fine with the one I have.QUOTE]
or possibly as annoying as mormons?


But seriously, I totally agree with you. There's seems to be a growing idea among so many individuals (all sides and angles of the political spectrum) that what they believe is the only right answer. I mean obviously if something is worth believing in it should be worth believing in whole heartedly but I think you hit the nail on the head when you talked about open mindedness.

Personaly, i think our religions and governments are to blame for this. Religion especially is the best example I can think of where "our way is right, everyone else is wrong/ignorant/needs to be saved" is the most prevelant.
Anti-Oedipus
25-08-2004, 10:36
No way! I totally disagree with you, and I'll tell you why I'm right and you're wrong, in twelve simple steps!!

ahem, sorry, just had to. ;)

seriously though, a few thoughts.

If you are expressing an opinion yourself, then you are making a declarative statement. This is in much the same way as you made a comment when you posted on this forum. This entitles other people to at least make a similar statement of their opinion. if they differ, then this is what you see as moral solicitation. much like when I respond to your statement. by your first statement/opinion, you have put your beliefs in the public arena, and by doing that, opened them up to examination and possibly challenge.

I guess, if you dont want people to comment on your opinions, the least you can do is not express them yourself. If this feels like a restriction on your speech rights, then thats because it probably is, much in the same way as asking people with strongly held beliefs to hold silent when you express something they disagree with.

I also think the issue/opinions that you are complaining about are likely a little stronger/wider importance/bigger than brand of coffee. If somebody gets really wound up about that then we might well think they had issues, but there are some things that are in much need of discussion. I'm not sure if the coffee analogy is such a good one.

Also might this not be a sense of rose-tinted nostalgia. People have always tried to convince others of their views, it's what comes from having strongly held beliefs. I know a lot of people will talk about tolerance, but really it is difficult to believe one thing and then also not-believe it.

Something just occured to me, in this past when people didnt challenge each others views, was this in a fairly homogeneous environment where people held fairly similar views? This would probably have less attempts to convince others of beliefs if there were already a store of shared meanings and beliefs than in a diverse and messy, pluralist environment.
Sydenia
25-08-2004, 10:42
No way! I totally disagree with you, and I'll tell you why I'm right and you're wrong, in twelve simple steps!!

ahem, sorry, just had to. ;)

seriously though, a few thoughts.

If you are expressing an opinion yourself, then you are making a declarative statement. This is in much the same way as you made a comment when you posted on this forum. This entitles other people to at least make a similar statement of their opinion. if they differ, then this is what you see as moral solicitation. much like when I respond to your statement. by your first statement/opinion, you have put your beliefs in the public arena, and by doing that, opened them up to examination and possibly challenge.

I guess, if you dont want people to comment on your opinions, the least you can do is not express them yourself. If this feels like a restriction on your speech rights, then thats because it probably is, much in the same way as asking people with strongly held beliefs to hold silent when you express something they disagree with.

I also think the issue/opinions that you are complaining about are likely a little stronger/wider importance/bigger than brand of coffee. If somebody gets really wound up about that then we might well think they had issues, but there are some things that are in much need of discussion. I'm not sure if the coffee analogy is such a good one.

Also might this not be a sense of rose-tinted nostalgia. People have always tried to convince others of their views, it's what comes from having strongly held beliefs. I know a lot of people will talk about tolerance, but really it is difficult to believe one thing and then also not-believe it.

Something just occured to me, in this past when people didnt challenge each others views, was this in a fairly homogeneous environment where people held fairly similar views? This would probably have less attempts to convince others of beliefs if there were already a store of shared meanings and beliefs than in a diverse and messy, pluralist environment.

I have no problem with differing opinions. I'm just not open for solicitation. You can express that you are perfectly happy being conservative, I just don't want you trying to sell me on the point. There is a very distinct difference between expressing an opinion, and cramming that opinion forcibly down someone elses throat.

Coffee was simply used as a non-offensive example, it may not be perfect, but eh. [shrugs] With regards to the last part, no, I didn't find in particular people all had the same opinions. It was simply a matter that differing opinions were expected and respected, rather than challenged. :)
Anti-Oedipus
25-08-2004, 11:02
I think its important to establish the difference between challenging and opinion and denigrating it.

for me, challenging an opinion is asking the right questions, probing potential weak spots, looking for contradictions etc. It's like the principle of falsification in science... it's an intellectual exercise, but it's more than that... an argument or opinion, a well founded one, can stand up to a challenge on it's merits.

denigrating an opinion is attacking it with no regard for that opinion. It's a cruder but potentially can seem more forceful. I think it's denegration and disrespect towards opinions that you have the problem with rather than challenging in my sense of it?
Dalekia
25-08-2004, 11:22
Perhaps you are around people who are more aware of things than before. How old are you? My arguments with people my age have really gained in quality with age. When I was fifteen I remember arguing about whether you can fold ANY paper more than 7 times in half (I was right) or whether piano tuners would be sent to the front lines in a war (the other guy's argument was that there a so few piano tuners that they are a scarce resource, which would need to be protected).

You could always talk about the weather. Don't try to guess what kind of weather you might be having tomorrow, but stick to the present weather. Don't use adjectives.

"It rains" = good
"It rains awfully lot" = bad, you're expressing an opinion
Cobwebland
25-08-2004, 12:03
I partially agree. People *do* seem to be extremely zealous in their beliefs these days, about essentially every topic, but I can't say for sure whether that's an increasing trend or whether I'm just now noticing it. Also, I think Anti-Oedipus hit it on the head when he said that a lot of arguments are based on people making declarative sentences. If Person A says "*this* is true, " and Person B says "*that* is true", they are both airing their opinions, but since English is incapable of showing a difference between a declarative sentence and an opinion mechanically, they get mixed up. It only really becomes moral solicitation when one party starts openly saying that the other is wrong, as a person. A lot of people (myself included) see argument as something of a sport, where (ideally) no bad feelings are intended, the same way fencers probably don't dislike their opponents for poking them. Refining each other's arguments and opinions in a good fight leaves both parties improved, regardless of who wins.