Would it be considered wrong if thats an opinion on what ...

Thus, categories that hold more emotional and value significance may be more important bases for meaningful social identification. We suggest that awareness of opinion congruence1 offers a psychologically meaningful basis for categorization by signifying a shared interpretation and vision of the world. Indeed, previous research has found that so-called opinion-based groups are particularly meaningful groups that can unite and mobilize individuals beyond physical, ideological, and sociodemographic boundaries (McGarty et al., 2014).

Applying Social Judgment Theory and the Spiral of Silence, we tested the effects of online comments and public opinion polls on the public's’ latitude…

In a wide variety of situations, individuals find it in their best interest to conform to social norms (Young, 2015) because of incentives for coordination (Sugden, 1989), social sanctions for noncompliance (Akerlof, 1980, Ostrom, 2000), or personal identity (Akerlof and Kranton, 2000). As it is in people’s best · This paper develops a theory of social norms of acceptable discourse that explains how norms emerge and how they shape beliefs and opinions.

Checking your browser before accessing pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov · Click here if you are not automatically redirected after 5 seconds

Subjectivism is the view that moral judgments merely state or express the emotions or preferences of the speaker. For a subjectivist, there is no need to give reasons for one's belief about ethical claims. To say that x is wrong is to say nothing other than that one doesn't like x.

Consider the example of the early, abolitionist movement in the United States prior to the abolishment of slavery: Was it wrong for a group of people in America to hold anti-slavery views given that the majority of the country was pro-slavery and the laws reflected such beliefs? Is it wrong for minority groups in other nations to hold views contrary to popular opinion and written law? If metaethical relativism is true, then a moral claim is true if it accords with the moral view of the culture and false if it is not.

This would mean that George W. Bush would have to have a press conference and say, “My apologies, I was wrong about WMD,” or for someone who argued fervently that Americans want a single-payer option for health care to instead argue something like, “The polls show that Americans want to change health care, but not through the single-payer option. My argument was based on my opinion that the single-payer option is the best way and not on public opinion.” Academics are more accustomed to retraction because our arguments are explicitly part of particular conversations.

Master List of Logical Fallacies · Fallacies are fake or deceptive arguments, "junk cognition," that is, arguments that seem irrefutable but prove nothing. Fallacies often seem superficially sound and they far too often retain immense persuasive power even after being clearly exposed as false.

Often moral issues can strike different emotional chords with people and it can seem disrespectful to tell people that they are wrong. If ethics is about how we feel about moral problems, then it seems hard to claim that it can rise above mere opinion. However, the view that ethics is all just a matter of opinion and relativism are not necessarily the same. If one believes that morality is dependent on culture, it would not warrant the claim that morality is all a matter of opinion, especially if we are only talking about a single person. Littering is considered a cultural faux-pas in North America so an individual would not be able to claim they are morally okay littering merely because it is their personal opinion that it is morally okay.