Misinformed, my opinion on opinions

I respect the right for everyone to have an opinion.

I also support freedom of speech.

But if your opinion is either:

  1. Not founded on any information, data, research, etc.
  2. Founded on false information, propaganda, etc.

Then you need to willing to accept that your opinion is flawed.

I have an opinion on almost everything, most of them are flawed. For example, I have an opinion on 50 Shades of Grey, in that there is a general negative connotation towards the book.

But my opinion is flawed because I have neither watched the movie, read the book, or done any prior research about what the story is about. I just simply have an opinion. I think everyone does.

However, if an advocate of the book/movie were to come up to me and be open to explaining the story and how there are beautiful nuances to the storytelling and creativity, I need to be completely willing to hear them out so I can better understand the situation.

In the same breath, if you have an opinion that is founded on false information (i.e. you read one source or you are a victim to propaganda) then you need to do a better job and understanding the topic through diverse sources, or else you fall into the spiraling trap of confirmation bias.

The best politicians and economists are not those that completely dismiss the other side. Instead, they understand many areas and try to utilize the best out of each perspective.

Full stop. I am a liberal. (Though, there are different left-right opinions regarding politics, economics, society, etc.)

But that doesn’t mean I support extremist liberal ideas, nor do I completely condemn all the ideas of the right.

I am a liberal (socially), but I respect capitalism and markets (more right-wing). I also believe in certain conservative approaches to tradition.

Full stop. I do not think Donald Trump is a good president. (Even though my opinion has no jurisdiction. I can Canadian, eh.).

I do not like many of the things Donald Trump says are does. But I’ve also done my research. And instead of condemning all the bad things he has done, I will point out the good things he has done:

  1. I believe that reducing the corporate tax rate in 2018 was a smart move on his part to help from billions of dollars worth of money back to America from overseas (Example: Apple)
  2. He is the only President willing to challenge China’s rising supreme power, which I believe can be a tactical move (however I do not necessarily agree with how he has approached the matter, nor his methods). I believe that China has had a bigger upside in trade with America and also has been a country known to curve around certain guidelines. However, I also believe that challenging China is roughly 20 years too late.
  3. Donald Trump has been active in trying to repair relationships between that of South Korea and North Korea.
  4. Donald Trump puts America first.

I remember back in 2016 when disliking Trump was an automatic response. It almost felt like “I hate Trump” could be a personality trait, just like my opinion on 50-Shades is. Yet, Trump had not become President yet, nor did we know what he planned to do, nor did many people actually understand his campaign. I personally believe that my opinion to dislike him is just a bit more grounded in information, having been a person who actively seeks to understand both sides of the situation. My opinion on 50 Shades of Grey? Not so grounded.

Opinions are powerful. And I respect people’s right to have them, and I believe sharing opinions is an even more powerful tool to incite debate and discussion.

I am still trying to understand how I can better understand people that fall into the first two categories (no information, or misinformed people).

Most of my opinions, as I mentioned, are flawed. But when I do have a strong opinion on something, I want people to know that I don’t carry that thought without any extensive research are thought on why I have that certain perspective. I want to know how I can help people understand the topics that I am passionate about. It is difficult for me to reach out to these types of people, and a part of me just wants to walk away and not debate with people who I know are clearly misinformed, but if I do that, I am afraid that my opinion will slowly die off. We live in a world of a sharing-digital era, and I’d feel remiss if I didn’t share my opinions.

If you see yourself having an opinion that is not based on information, I urge you to be open about someone helping you better understand the situation.

If you believe you are misinformed on an opinion, or that you only have on side of the story,, I urge you to seek out more diverse sources and talk to people more familiar with the matter.

So, does anyone want to explain to me why 50 Shades of Grey is a good story?

Should we separate the art from the artist?

Watercolor of St. Charles's Church in Vienna by Adolf Hitler

Should we separate the art from the artist?
 
Separate the player from the game?
 
The inventor from his creations?
 
Steve Jobs was an asshole.
 
Michael Jordan trash talked everyone. So did Charles Barkley, Larry Bird, Shaq.
 
Chris Brown hit Rihanna.
 
It’s actually quite a relevant topic. Particularly in today’s age, where the ethics of a person are more under the spotlight, as well as the increasing demand for quality art.
 
I personally think: yes. We should.
 
A good painting is a good painting regardless of the creator.
 
But the answer to this question isn’t as simple as just “yes”
 
Because if we separate the art from the artist, then it also means that the art cannot justify the actions of the person.
 
Just because Steve Jobs invented the iPhone, doesn’t mean we can let him get away from being an asshole.
 
The iPhone is amazing. And if Steve Jobs as not particularly kind to Apple employees, it doesn’t take away from the fact that Jobs pioneered the smartphone industry with the iPhone. Give credit where credit is due–but also realize that it doesn’t negate the fact of Jobs’ demeanor.
 
If you like Chris Brown’s music, then sure. You can like his music, separate from the person.
 
I dislike Kevin Durant as a person, but I have to admit that he is one of the greatest basketball scorers the NBA has ever seen. Respect the player, but not the person.
 
Let’s say we don’t separate art from the artist. Tied together, it allows for way too many inconsistencies.
 
Does good art justify the person? Or, does a quality human being justify his art?
 
I’m sorry but in the face of creativity, regardless of how good of a person the artist is if his art is not good, it is just not good. We must separate the art from the artist.
 
Good art is good art. But good art DOES NOT justify the creator to use his art as an excuse to be anything less than a quality human being.
 
Good people are good people. But the goodness of a person does not suddenly make his art good.
 
To summarize: I agree that art should be separate from the artist. This way, we can respect good art, without respecting the creator, and we can respect the creator even if his art is bad.
 
What do you think?
 
Also, the cover photo of this blog post is a painting by none other than Hitler. If only Hitler pursued his art, rather than his other endeavors…
 
P.S. If I am completely crazy, please let me know. I genuinely want to know what you think and I encourage insightful debate and discussion.