This is going in the Quotable Quotes thread...

 

Just because what counts as really anything these days is so bare-minimum doesn't mean that reading a book is actually anything impressive.

 

​

 

holy herculean hard headedness, batman!!! Although these two words are sometimes misused as similar, you will see by the definitions provided that they are, in fact, two completely different things:

interpretation [ɪnˌtɜːprɪˈteɪʃən]
n 1. the act or process of interpreting or explaining; elucidation
2. the result of interpreting; an explanation
3. a particular view of an artistic work, esp as expressed by stylistic individuality in its performance
4. explanation, as of the environment, a historical site, etc., provided by the use of original objects, personal experience, visual display material, etc.
5. (Philosophy / Logic) Logic an allocation of significance to the terms of a purely formal system, by specifying ranges for the variables, denotations for the individual constants, etc.; a function from the formal language to such elements of a possible world

o·pin·ion (-pnyn) n. 1. A belief or conclusion held with confidence but not substantiated by positive knowledge or proof: "The world is not run by thought, nor by imagination, but by opinion" (Elizabeth Drew).
2. A judgment based on special knowledge and given by an expert: a medical opinion.
3. A judgment or estimation of the merit of a person or thing: has a low opinion of braggarts.
4. The prevailing view: public opinion.
5. Law A formal statement by a court or other adjudicative body of the legal reasons and principles for the conclusions of the court.

 

That one is worth a quote too.

Where on Earth did that come from?

 

you mean this opinion . . . which I would have guessed you'd agree with

"Jesus is more fact to people today than Caesar."

 

How is that more valid than/different from an opinion again?

 

That may be true.......but it's still just an opinion.

There's nothing out there to actually back it up.

 

There are people who are far smarter than us who have already had this conversation. If this conversation is really desirable, we should start at a baseline from the past and try and build from it. If he wants to challenge my veracity in citing Lewis, he should at least have read Lewis. Otherwise, he should leave his "opinion" to himself until he's qualified to speak at the level the conversation attained while he was skipping class to be the greeter at the front door of a Wal-Mart.

 

There is no "we" or "us".

Well there is but you ain't a part of it, douche.

And no, idiot; that is not how it works. If you want to build from the past, you look up actual fucking factual information, not opinions. You're supposed to be able to think for your damn self.

 

Hmmm....I'm guessing none of them are in your circle of acquaintance.

 

wow, really?

An opinion requires only the expression of a belief, i.e. - "The Celtics will win it all this year."; whereas interpetation requires explanation.

Opinion = belief not necessarily supported / Interpretation = explanation of a viewpoint, idea or feeling.

there is a vast difference between the two, but I am not surprised that you still seem confused

 

You've still yet to actually answer my question of how an interpretation is above an opinion or a more valid source than an opinion. It's still not fact, and as such, if you haven't been specifically asked for your interpretation, you have to include "In my opinion".

 

You sure about that? If you assert that at least every Christian and Muslim believes that the Jesus of the bible existed - then throw in a certain ratio of all the other major religions who, while not aquiescing to the christian belief system, certainly belief in his existence - then add those folks who just believe it all out of habit rather than faith . . . you may very well come up with a number greater than those who even know that Caesar existed, let alone be able to argue about it.

I have not seen such a poll, however .

 

If you don't agree with this statement then you are without a doubt a douche; period.

 

I believe you'd argue with a signpost given the chance Neither one is "above" or "more valid" than the other - they are merely different - they mean different things - they are not synonyms, they are not good substitutions for one another.

Who made the rule you cited above? What is the source of authority I should refer to? Is this in Emily Post's Etiquette? Is there an online code that requires one to announce, "this is my opinion" when elucidating on a subject of interest? Do you ever get tired of just making stuff up?

 

MLA/ALA for one.

Keep talkin shit. I've yet to make up a damn thing when presenting an argument.

 

lol.....I'm not sure such a poll exists!!

However.......I'm pretty sure the Jewish bunch would affirm the existence of JC..........so, in terms of major religions, I guess that just leaves the Hindus......

and just about anything is God to them.....so we can probably discount their opinion as total fantasy.....as entertaining as it is!!

I'm sure there might be a few Italians who still see Ceasar in an empirical light though......

Mussolini would be one....if he wasn't slightly dead! :excited:

 

please cite the source for this rule - you say you didn't "make it up", you must have the reference somewhere, yes? I'm very curious:

p.s. - although you have been arguing for a few hours, you've yet to make an argument

 

Don't think so. I'm done with your pseudo-intellectual drivel.

Sorry douche but I'll never ever ever be what you keep trying to make me out to be.