The Right to Your Opinion - Jamie Whyte Crimes Against Logic

Jamie Whyte's book "Crimes Against Logic" claims to 'expose the bogus arguments of politicians, priests, journalists, and other serial offenders' - but on reading it I find that some of the most egregious crimes are committed by the author himself.

Whyte opens with an argument that we don't have the right to our own opinion - rather we should defer to everyone we meet who has a more glib argument, or is considered an 'expert' or 'authority'.

There are several problems with this profoundly un-democratic opinion.

http://www.amazon.com/What-a-crock/forum/FxLWQ94T0AJCYS/Tx1HYL0E8D1WFIL/1/ref...

Category:

Education

Tags:

• crimes
• against
• logic
• jamie
• whyte
• philosophy
• philosopher
• fallacy
• error
• bogus
• right
• to
• your
• opinion
• anti
• democratic

[EconTruth]

He's not saying you don't have "right to your own opinion"; he's saying you can't fall back on "it's my opinion" when someone refutes you with a sound argument.

And has nothing to do with who's the expert. He had a whole chapter dedicated to the fact that an argument is right or wrong based on the argument, NOT the arguer.

Also addressed putting different and false arguments in the mouths of others so you can "defeat" them...you ought to re-read those because that's exactly what you're doing.

[proudfootz]

@EconTruth

Whyte does often put strawmen arguments into the mouths of those he wishes to pretend he has defeated in argument.

In Whyte's example where he puts 'I have a right to my opinion' into the mouth of his antagonist the argument is about something which *neither* person can know - the motivation of a person whose genuine thoughts are not available to mortal human beings. Both Jack and Jill are talking about their opinions, and neither can 'refute' the other on this topic.

[EconTruth]

@proudfootz Thanks for reply, but you misunderstand my comment. I'm saying that YOU are putting an argument into Whyte's mouth (committing straw man). Whyte never says "an expert opinion is always right and you can't have an opinion". Whyte's point is: one can't fall back on "it's my opinion" if someone presents one with a sound refuting argument. In fact, Whyte spent much of book arguing that whether or not you're an "expert" is irrelevent compared to whether or not your argument is true.

[proudfootz]

@EconTruth

Perhaps I go too far - but as explained in the video the invented argument between Jack and Jill is one in which Jack is supposedly compelled to 'convert' to Jill's opinion because he has no answer to her arguments and dodges this with reference to his right to his opinion.

Likewise if a Mormon missionary comes to my door and I have not the expertise to answer his arguments I am compelled to convert?

No, I retain my right to my opinion even if I can't 'refute' other's opinions.

[EconTruth]

@proudfootz

Good point! Made me rethink this. I don't think Whyte says because you're personally unable to refute an argument, that argument must be true...which I agree is silly. I think Whyte's point is that "my right to my opinion" should not be confused with refutation. Your right to your opinion (Mormonism is not your preferred religion) doesn't disprove Mormonism.

Also, I think the point applies when people claim "opinion" on objective issues, not subjective issues (religion or art).

[proudfootz]

@EconTruth

I agree - citing one's right to an opinion is neither a refutation of someone else's argument nor is it a guarantee that opinion is true.

[proudfootz]

@Jebus495

I agree the opinions of experts are worth listening to. They need to be weighed and considered like every other.

[Jebus495]

You're right and wrong at the same time. It's not that we need to concede to the ideas of experts, it's that we should know enough about logic to concede when it is logical to do so. I believe the point is that we can't talk out of our asses and expect the opinion formed to be anything close to reasonable. It's more or less an issue of trusting any given expert. Experts aren't experts because they're smarter than other people, it's because they have an immense base of knowledge on a subject.

[proudfootz]

@ghettokaiba

Sorry - I don't have any such book.

Actually most of the books I have read seem to have a slant opposite of the interests of ordinary people.

[proudfootz]

@LaborHours

Glad you agree.