Re: [Harp-L] re: best harp/answer

["Vern Smith" <jevern@xxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joe and Cass Leone" <leone@xxxxxxxx>
To: <harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, November 25, 2006 10:03 PM
Subject: Re: [Harp-L] re: best harp/answer


> > It's as simple as adding the little abbreviation IMO (which stands  for 
> > In My Opinion) to statements of preference, thus taking them  from being 
> > definitive and absolute statements into subjective and  personal ones.
>
> >
> No one should have to add IMO to anything on this list. IMO is  assumed. 
> Even if someone is quoting someone else. that 'other' person  should be 
> assumed as IMO also. Even if you have proof, it's STILL  IMO. Why? Because 
> things that had heretofore been accepted as fact  have been proven wrong 
> later. Sooo, the safest thing is: EVERYTHING  is IMO.
>
> Merely IMO...... :)  ....... lol   ......smokey-joe

By assuming that everything is an opinion, you are arbitrarily ruling out 
statements of fact on harp-l and severely curtailing the range of possible 
communication..  Even if the writer is mistaken,  he should be allowed to 
make a statement as fact.  Then if you have contradictory evidence, you can 
present it in an effort to clarify what is true and what is not.  The 
important thing is to keep the discussion about facts dispassionate and free 
of personal insults.  No one should have their feelings hurt when someone 
presents an opposing argument to a statement of fact.  The truth exists 
independently of what anyone thinks about it and it can be eventually found 
by examining the evidence.  The problem arises when someone interprets a 
challenge to their factual statement as a personal insult.

You may disagree with an opinion and present a different opinion.  This is 
all about what people think.  You may challenge a fact by presenting 
contradictory evidence.  This has nothing to do with what people think!

At the end of every presentation of a scientific paper, the 
question-and-answer session might seem to be a vicious attack.  It is 
assumed that the presenter of fact is able to defend his assertions against 
all comers.  The severe questioning is a useful hurdle for the assertions to 
pass before being accepted.  The challenges may come from the best of 
personal friends and are not interpreted as insults.

By making everything an opinion, you try to make objective reality 
irrelevant and every statement equally valid.  The use of "IMO" means that 
the writer does not claim that his statement is necessarily objectively 
true.  At the same time, he makes it impervious to attack because no one can 
challenge an opinion.  e.g. "IMO, Robert Bonfiglio is the greatest harmonica 
player."

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts."... Daniel 
Patrick Moynihan.

Vern