Hacker News Reader

Comment by evandale | Hacker News Reader

Definitely agree to disagree at this point.

> You're making distinctions that don't exist.

>Thinking rain is good because it waters your garden is based on the fact that it will help your garden grow.

>Thinking rain is good because it sounds pleasant is based on the fact that you enjoy the sound of the rain.

I'm not sure how you can say the distinctions don't exist. There has to be an analogy but I don't think I can come up with one that will satisfy you. I mean you had to rewrite my example to make your point.. not sure how that's not the world's most obvious strawman, you literally twisted what I said into something else and went on to argue against that.

I think it's easy enough to glean what I mean from my past replies if someone wanted to try to understand me.

View on HN

> you literally twisted what I said into something else and went on to argue against that.

I had to, your original post contained two factual statements and no opinions, so there was nothing to argue!

Based on your previous replies I think your distinction is that liking the sound of rain is different because it’s a thought conjured up inside your head? “It is good that my garden grows” is also a thought conjoured up in your head that others may disagree with. Your argument seems to require some kind of appeal to objective authority that doesn’t exist.

(I know I said the last post was the end for me but I’ll admit to being somewhat fascinated by the counter argument here)

Are you going to continue this conversation or stop? You continue to muddy the waters and twist things and now I don't even know what the original point is.

You've continuously refused to define opinion for me and continuously refuse to put anything in your own words. You throw paragraphs of strawman at me because I'm being unclear. You throw 3 dictionary links in my face with at least 25 different definitions and can't zero in on a single one.

Back at the top you said:

> An example of "corporate opinion" off the top of my head: Facebook is in favour of advertising.

Can you first confirm you said that and you stand by the statement? If you do, explain to me how Facebook saying "we are in favour of advertising" is an opinion.

Now explain to me how "I like rain" is different and not an opinion. You told me "I like rain" is "a factual statement derived from your opinion" and not an opinion and then used that to strawman my argument.

Where I stand "I am in favour of advertising" is the exact same format and is not an opinion from YOUR definition. So how about you explain exactly what you want from me because your contradictions are confusing me.

> Are you going to continue this conversation or stop?

I am going to stop. Your definition of opinion is not one I've ever encountered before but you're welcome to hold it. I can't see any point in continuing to explain the differences.

What's your definition!? Can you please summarize it, I'm dying to know here... or answer this?

> An example of "corporate opinion" off the top of my head: Facebook is in favour of advertising.

How is Facebook saying "we are in favour of advertising" an opinion?

How is "I like rain" is different and not an opinion? You told me "I like rain" is "a factual statement derived from your opinion" and not an opinion and then used that to strawman my argument.

Where I stand "I am in favour of advertising" is the exact same format and is not an opinion from YOUR definition. How are they different?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com