×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

OPINIONS
8

OPINIONS

OPINIONS

(OP)
I enjoy dealing with people with firm opinions, especially if they agree with my opinion. That is not necessary, but it makes life simpler.

I do remember not having an opinion on a topic, but that got me prosecuted (from a prosecutor son).
I pleaded fatherhood and he quit.

"There are actually men who through fear of unpopularity will not dare to express their opinions, however excellent." On Moral Duties, Cicero
jimbo

Buy a dictionary, keep it nearby and USE it. Webster's New World Dictionary of American English is recommended, and Webster's Collegiate Dictionary.

RE: OPINIONS

I have found I would rather listen to someone with a differing but well-reasoned opinion than someone with a similar opinion that wasn't thought through carefully.

RE: OPINIONS

I prefer to talk to those who have an opinion, but are also open to the views of others.  Their opinion can be changed with a good argument.  Those who have made up their minds and are not open to an alternative view are generally unpleasant to spend any time with.

RE: OPINIONS

"Those whose opinions are changed against there will are of the same opinion still"
Can't think who said it, but true enough.
A difference of opnion is a far greater incentive to creative thinking than a shared opinion.
People who share opinions and band together find strength not in the turth of their views but in their numbers and use that strength to tyranise others.
The truth is elusive but opinions flourish.

JMW
www.ViscoAnalyser.com

RE: OPINIONS

Just as white light consists of 7 different colors,but we see only one color ,similarly different opinions could exist , but the result or outcome should be unique.

RE: OPINIONS

I admire people who change their opinion. This is usually seen as a sign of weakness, but the acquisition of knowledge and evidence should allow an intelligent person to re-assess his or her opinion, and enable them to say 'I was wrong - I now believe this'.

Sadly, people continue to hold untenable opinions, even in the face of overwhelming new evidence to the contrary. Maybe the earth is flat.

John

RE: OPINIONS

If you really want to test your opinion on a subject, try using the Theory of Constraints Thinking Processes.  Thinking for a Change by Lisa Scheinkopf is a great book for how to apply these tools.

In short, it is our unverbalized assumptions that will confirm or refute our positions.

Erik

RE: OPINIONS

There is an old saying...

Wisdom changes hands among the wise.

RE: OPINIONS

2

"For those who believe, no proof is necessary.  For those who do not believe, no proof is possible."  Stuart Chase

"If you are going to walk on thin ice, you might as well dance!"

RE: OPINIONS

Stuart Chase can't have been a scientist or mathematician, in my opinion.

corus

RE: OPINIONS

Based on the attitudes shown in the defuct ID thread, Mr. Chase could have been talking about engineers.

I think one of the toughest hurdles for anyone is to recognize the difference between what one knows and what one believes.  Further, I think it is a sign of wisdom when one comes to the realization that when dealing with philosophical beliefs, it is not a matter of right and wrong, it is a matter of difference.

Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

RE: OPINIONS

Cajun,

Are you saying their is no right and wrong?  Further, do you believe there is one ultimate truth?

Some people believe (myself included) that a single truth exists, and we are simply seek to understand it.  Others believe truth is relative, such that your truth and my truth could be different.

Neither of these can be definatively proven.  Both are fundemental to anyone's formation of a world view.

RE: OPINIONS

My point chemELK is that what you've expressed in your previous post is your belief.  It is a perfectly valid belief, but it may not be what someone else chooses to believe, and that too is perfectly valid.  Since any belief system, or philosophy, is not truly knowable, as it is only a set of personal opinions, any discussion about them being right or wrong is moot, and I think counter-productive.  The intellectual value is in analyzing the differences between various beliefs systems, and in analyzing inconsistencies within a specific belief system.  But then, that is simply my opinion.

As far as answers to your specific questions, I'd be more than happy to engage, but I'm not sure this is right place for it.

Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

RE: OPINIONS

Perception is reality... That's what I've always believed anyway.

When it comes to mathmatical equasions, two people working the same problem with the same methods will probably come to the same solution. In life, in matters of observation, where people use thier minds to interperet data, truth is subjective and open to debate... always.

RE: OPINIONS

chemELK, I think that it's pretty obvious that there is more than one truth in some instances. Just reread the last two or three replies in this thread and you'll see how you and CajunCenturion demonstrate that fact.

Not trying to be a smart ass or anything... Just pointing out the obvious.

RE: OPINIONS

I think we need to be careful in what we mean by "more than one truth".

You can say the stop sign is red.   I can say the stop sign is an octagon.  Both of our truths are valid as they don't contradict.

But, I can say 2 + 2 = 5 and you can say 2 + 2 = 4.  No matter how much I believe 2 + 2 = 5 is my "truth", it's still incorrect.

Edward L. Klein
Pipe Stress Engineer
Houston, Texas

"All the world is a Spring"

All opinions expressed here are my own and not my company's.

RE: OPINIONS

==> No matter how much I believe 2 + 2 = 5 is my "truth", it's still incorrect.

Are you absolutely sure? As I said earlier, one of the intellectual aspects is identifying inconsistencies within a belief system.  But we must first understand what is the underlying belief system, which in this case, is something that we take for granted in our sleep.  2 + 2 = 5 is incorrect if we are operating under the same fundamentals of mathematics, (and we are using the same symbology, but I don't want to go down that road).  In other words, it is incorrect only in context.  In this particular case, the context is what we accept as the fundamentals of mathematics.  I don't know of any other context, and whereas I acknowledge the possibility that some other intelligence may have a completely different fundamentals of mathematics, it's inconceivable to me what that might be.  I completely agree that 2 + 2 = 5 is wrong, because we are, even though we may not realize it, putting that statement in a context, and it is inconsistent with that context.

Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

RE: OPINIONS

I think it was Bertrand Russell who set about "proving" the axioms of mathematics and found it not to be possible.
In other words at the core of math are beliefs not truths.
With a different set of beliefs maybe we have some other truths such as that 2+2=5.

JMW
www.ViscoAnalyser.com

RE: OPINIONS

(all together now...)

...for sufficiently large values of 2.

Hg

Eng-Tips guidelines:  FAQ731-376

RE: OPINIONS

A clear example to distinguish between bellief and truth. " A mother knows the child is hers,but a father only believes it is his".

RE: OPINIONS

In this day and age a father does know a child is his as tests can prove it beyond reasonable doubt. However, this does lend itself to some uncertainty, however slight that is. With mathematical theories, however, there is no doubt, no uncertainty. A mathematical proof is a proof and cannot be disputed because of one's 'beliefs'. Mathematics is pure science. Physics, engineering, and other sciences do have an element of belief and can only be proved to a certain degree of confidence by experiment. Even Einstein's theories have been improved upon, and will no doubt be continued to do so.  

corus

RE: OPINIONS

You'll never learn anything if you only read/hear opinions you agree with.

RE: OPINIONS

[quote] ‘I have come to believe, though very reluctantly, that it consists of tautologies. I fear that, to a mind of sufficient intellectual power, the whole of mathematics would appear trivial, as trivial as the statement that a four-footed animal is an animal’.[20] Mathematical knowledge, Russell came to think, ‘is, in fact, merely verbal knowledge. "3" means "2+1", and "4" means "3+1". Hence it follows (though the proof is long) that "4" means the same as "2+2". Thus mathematical knowledge ceases to be mysterious. It is all of the same nature as the "great truth" that there are three feet in a yard.'{/quote]
http://www.royalinstitutephilosophy.org/articles/cam_russell.htm

An interesting read.

Oh yes, there is a saying:
"Chemists defer to Physisists, Physisists defer to Methematicians, Mathematicians defer to God." (Engineers are not mentioned.)  

JMW
www.ViscoAnalyser.com

RE: OPINIONS

"Engineers are not mentioned"

I think you'll find they are - God, the greatest engineer of them all

(If you believe in that sort of thing)

RE: OPINIONS

Ok.  Since this is a kinda unusual thread and I haven't had my morning coffee yet I must add my two cents.

Quote:

Others believe truth is relative, such that your truth and my truth could be different.

Truth can never be relative by definition.  

What is true can only be true.  If it can be made to be false then it was never a truth to begin with - just an assumption or an opinion.

To perceive a truth to be false makes one a liar to oneself.

Quote:

"Engineers are not mentioned"

I think you'll find they are - God, the greatest engineer of them all

This is probably why so many Engineers think they are God.

RE: OPINIONS

==> With mathematical theories, however, there is no doubt, no uncertainty. A mathematical proof is a proof and cannot be disputed because of one's 'beliefs'.
Those 'beliefs' are the fundamental axioms of mathematics.  These are statements that we faithfully accept as being true, and they form the foundation upon which all mathematics is built.  As an example, Euclidean Geometry is based on the following five axioms.
  • Any two points can be joined by a straight line.
  • Any straight line segment can be extended indefinitely in a straight line.
  • Given any straight line segment, a circle can be drawn having the segment as radius and one endpoint as center.
  • All right angles are congruent.
  • If two lines are drawn which intersect a third in such a way that the sum of the inner angles on one side is less than two right angles, then the two lines inevitably must intersect each other on that side if extended far enough.

  • If any of these beliefs turns out to be false, then Euclidean Geomety will crumble, and so will all of its proofs.  Many consider Peano's axioms to be the foundations of arithmetic itself, not the least of which is the fifth axiom:  "If a set of numbers S contains 0 as well as the successor of every number in S, then every number is in S."  That axiom is critical to inductive proofs.  That axiom has not been proven, yet that belief forms the basis of all inductive proofs.  If it turns out to be false, then every inductive proof comes into question.  Also, please note that the axiom is based on set theory, which itself contains 10 fundamental axioms.

    Mathematics is a beautiful system, and much work has been done, and is being done, about its consistency and completeness, but as jmw states, "at the core of math are beliefs not truths".

    "We hold these truths to be self-evident ..." because as of yet, none of them have been proven.

    Quote (corus):

    Mathematics is pure science.
    If mathematics is pure science, and mathematics is axiomatic, then so too must science be axiomatic.

    Good Luck
    --------------
    As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

    RE: OPINIONS

    Is there really a fundamental difference between an axiom and a hypthesis? Or is an axiom simply a hypothesis that is so beautiful that nobody would want to falsify it? If so then mathematics, science and religion (which is highly axiomatic) are pretty d@mn closely related.

    RE: OPINIONS

    I think there is a difference between an axiom and an hypothesis.  An axiom is accepted at face value as being true, and in fact, may not be provable or disprovable.  Very likely, it is not provable within or by the system to which it applies.  A hypothesis, on the other hand, is expected to be either proven or disproven.

    ==> If so then mathematics, science and religion (which is highly axiomatic) are pretty d@mn closely related.
    It is my personal opinion that the three are far more closely related than most are comfortable admitting.

    However, in all fairness to math and science, they rigorously and formally try to show that their axiomatic systems are consistent, i.e. that you cannot derive a statement from the axioms that contracts an axiom.  Further, any claim made by math or science must be derivable from the axioms.  That essentially is what a math proof is.  It is the logical derivation of a claim from the fundamental axioms.

    I find religion to be far less formal or rigorous.

    Good Luck
    --------------
    As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

    RE: OPINIONS

    As long as we're on the topic, what about a theory compared to a hypothesis?

    Also, is there a difference between a "regular" theory and a scientific theory?

    To me, a theory is conjecture or an explanation based on observations and assumptions.  I agree with Cajun that a hypothesis is expected to be proven or disproven, whereas I don't think that's necessarily true for a theory (but maybe can be).

    I've also come to the conclusion that when people use the phrase "scientific theory," they mean "hypothesis."

    Then again, maybe these are just my personal conventions.

    RE: OPINIONS

    ==> Then again, maybe these are just my personal conventions.
    How can you have a personal convention?  We can all have our own personal definitions, which may be right or wrong to varying degrees, but a convention implies agreement with something or somebody.

    Good Luck
    --------------
    As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

    RE: OPINIONS

    convention or conviction?

    RE: OPINIONS

    To All,

    In regards to people with firm opions who like to argue, which I was in my yonger years; I found that things changed as I got older.
    My  willingness to hold strong and debate my viewpoint decressed, not only because my self-rightous decreased but also because as I became more experienced in life, I relized how little I really know.
    But today I enjoy discovering the subtlies of arguments, that can be learned from books like "The Book of the Fallacy", by Pirie Madsen which can be viewed on the Adam Smith Society website.

    Thanks

    RE: OPINIONS

    It's hard to believe that nobody has yet mentioned the quote, "Bring me into the company of those who seek the truth, and deliver me from those who have found it."

    RE: OPINIONS

    "To me, a theory is conjecture or an explanation based on observations and assumptions.  I agree with Cajun that a hypothesis is expected to be proven or disproven, whereas I don't think that's necessarily true for a theory (but maybe can be)."

    By my understanding:

    -All science begins with observation
    -The most crude form of science is to classify the observations
    -A less crude science makes correlations amongst the observations (We've always observed A and B happening together / We've always seen A or B, but never both/ etc.)
    -The ultimate form of science achieved by man to date is the effect-cause-effect method (it shows causality) also known as the scientific method

    In the effect-cause-effect method, we start with an observation or axiom.  We then speculate as to the cause of the observations (hence the observation is an effect).  When we have a predicted cause, or hypothesis, we then determine something else which we believe must be true if the cause exists.  A test or experiment is then devised to determine if the predicted effect can be found.  If and only if the effect is found, then a new theory is made:
    (predicted cause) causes (observed effect).

    This theory is valid, at minimum, over the range of conditions in which it has been tested.  In order to be true it must be tested over all conditions to be proven true; hence science cannot prove anything - it can only show validity.  If in the future a condition is found where the theory can be shown to be false, a limit to the validity of the theory is formed. As an example, we know Newton's Laws of Motion are not true (first shown by Einstein).  Yet Newton's Laws of motion are valid under a very wide range of conditions.

    RE: OPINIONS

    Interesting discussion..

    I am humbled everyday of my life by something.  The more I learn, the more I realize that I don't know very much in the grand scheme of things.

    I used to LOVE to debate and argue, but not much anymore.  Life is short, very very short and I now try to keep an open mind and do ALOT more listening and learning.  I have my beliefs and values of course, but striving to improve, grow, learn and become a better engineer and human being is what's really important to at this time.

    With an engineering degree, working on my PCS, (Professional Soils Classifier license) and I still feel sometimes like I don't know a darn thing! Is anything truly mastered and understood?  No.. It seems I've got alot more learning and studying to do.  Will the reading studying and learning ever end!!!! NO.

    It's amazing!  The more you study, learn and understand, the more you realize how little you know.

    Existance exist.  I deal with it one day at a time.

    This is good forum, enjoy the metal stimulation.

    Ray

    RE: OPINIONS

    I lurked into this thread and after reading a half dozen or so posts, it occurred to me that I needed the 'given' definition to think through this whole thing more clearly.  Dictionary.com provided the following definitions:

    o•pin•ion      P   Pronunciation Key  ( -p n y n)
    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.

    My Holt dictionary number one (1.) definition is similar with the above number one (1.) definition but reads as follows:
    A belief or statement based at least partly on one’s judgment rather than upon clear or proven fact; notion; view.

    It appears from this definition that facts should not dissuade, corrupt, or impinge upon ones opinions.  That’s just my opinion with tongue in cheek.

    Cajun:  Have you ever heard of Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance?  This is only one tome of a plethora of rigorous studies of a religion but don’t let the facts construe your opinion.
    There is a famous document that includes the words,” …We hold these truths to be self evident…”
    This statement is suggestive to many that there is such a thing as absolute truth and that some truths are more obvious than others.  The axioms which form the basis of mathematics are prime examples.  The truth of these axioms is self evident to the point that no one would challenge their veracity taken in context.  And for that matter why would one want to take them out of context?  OK for the sake of argument one can take it out of context but then I must argue that you have taken it out of context and therefore your argument in invalid.

    RE: OPINIONS

    ==> The truth of these axioms is self evident to the point that no one would challenge their veracity taken in context.
    For the longest time it was self-evident that the earth was flat. smile

    You do make a valid point about 'context', and that axiomatic veracity is limited to their context.  The axioms of mathmeatics that I presented are in the context of Euclidean geomety.  I agree that you cannot take them outside of the context Euclidean geometry, but I ask you, how applicable to reality is the context of Euclidean geometry?  Not all of the axioms hold in ellptic or hyperbolic geometry.

    Yes, I've heard of, but I'm not particularly familiar with Strong's Exhaustive Concordance.  Are you suggesting that because of this, and/or in conjunction with other similar rigorous and exhaustive studies, that religion, or more to the point in this case, Christianity, can be derived from a set of fundamental axioms in a specific context?

    If so, then please define the context, and enumerate the axioms within that context.

    Good Luck
    --------------
    As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

    RE: OPINIONS

    "...how applicable to reality is the context of Euclidean geometry?"  I'm sorry, could you expand on this question?

    Although I believe there is intimate connection of most these ideas, I am not into religious apologetics and had intended the folowing to start a new paragraph but when I submitted to Post it deleted the spaces before..." There is a famous document"...  In other words, I was addressing about three different people and jumbled things a little so that the context was agglomerated.  I trust this sounds sufficietly vague.

    I was simply surprised that someone of your intellect would use unsubstantiated lack of rigor as a criteria of comparison in that context.

    RE: OPINIONS

    Don't remember where I heard it but it seems to apply here...

    "There are always three sides to any issue - yours, mine, and the truth."

    That one line has served me well in a variety of situations - design discussions, contract negotiations, personnel issues.

    RE: OPINIONS

    Opinions are like a******s, everybody's got one, and they all stink except for your own.

    Red Flag This Post

    Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

    Red Flag Submitted

    Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
    The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

    Reply To This Thread

    Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

    Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


    Resources