Ask Lemmy

Yes, not having an option on something is fine. when people push you can always whip out "I don't know enough about the topic to have an opinion."

I would say it's better to not have an opinion than to have an uninformed opinion.

Like a kid who has a strong opinion on a food that they've never tried. How can you know you don't like something if you never tried it? Sure.

You could look at the ingredients and if you don't like anything that goes in it you can assume that you wouldn't like the end product, but at least some thought went into at that point.

I don’t have an opinion about this.

Not having an opinion is MUCH better than sticking to an uninformed opinion with stubborn fervor. Nobody can possibly know everything, so it’s perfectly fine to take time out to research something, or decide that it’s not worth your time and forget about it completely.

It depends. Of course it's fine to have no opinion about, say, which sports team should win the big game, because that doesn't matter. And even on bigger issues like fiscal policy, it's okay to just admit you don't know enough about a complicated subject to have an informed opinion. While I do think it's important to educate yourself as much as you can, no one can reasonably learn everything about everything in order to have all of the right opinions all of the time.

But some issues are both important and clear cut. Like, if someone says they have "no opinion" on whether LGBTQ people deserve equal rights... no, no I will not accept "no opinion" as an answer here. You don't need to read mountains of theory to disavow bigotry, and if anyone tries to give an excuse for why they won't, I'll consider that complicit.

"I don't know enough to have an informed opinion about this" is an admirable stance to take.

When it's a cop-out for not wanting to be politically informed, it's a crappy place to be. It can sound a lot like "I don't know and I don't care".

IDK man.

Sometimes it's also, is it really important to know? A lot of things I have complicated opinions of because things are nuanced and complicated in the real world, so for example even if you ask me it's not like I can just be for or against Israel or whatever. And I certainly don't feel like going over it again and again and again as people keep asking about random topics.

I swear americans have this weird thing where everyone needs to have a strong opinion on every topic all the time, and talk about it all the time so they can sus out if you're leaning democrat or republican. It's so weird. I'm not even american, I can't do anything about it! I'll keep my opinions where they belong, in my head, thank you.

It's important to be educated about those topics but I don't feel the need to make it my entire personnality, unlike some people. I have better things to do that actually brings me joy rather than doom and gloom over things I can't do anything about.

I mean, it's okay to not have positions on a lot of things. People tend to get upset if the position you're dithering over is whether they or their loved ones deserve to live or have equal human rights. Most other things, honorable people may differ.

How important is it to educate yourself and ask questions?

Very. Everything is political, and ignorance about politics is a luxury. It allows others to make decisions for you, often ones you wouldn't choose yourself.

Of course, it’s okay. Being able to say “I don’t know” is a sign of intelligence in itself.

A huge number of people form opinions based on very limited knowledge, but these opinions then become part of their identity, and they feel compelled to defend them tooth and nail. I think the middle ground here is the idea of “strong opinions, loosely held,” meaning you have an opinion, but you understand it’s based on the best knowledge available at the time. You leave room for new information and allow your opinion to evolve. In fact, most opinions probably should be like that. There are very few views I hold that I feel are almost guaranteed not to change.

The Dunning-Kruger effect plays a big role here. When someone gains a moderate amount of knowledge on a subject, they often feel like they have a good understanding of it. But as they keep learning, they realize just how little they actually know. Uninformed people, by contrast, don’t know what they don’t know. These are the ones who write comments on social media pretending they’ve solved complex issues with simplistic solutions like “just do X,” while completely ignoring all the nuance. When you then try to introduce that nuance, they dig their heels in, taking it as a personal attack rather than a critique of their idea. This happens because they didn’t leave room for new information - they locked in their opinion, made it part of their identity, and threw away the key.

Don't have an opinion. Have a code of ethics and empathy. That'll dictate your opinions when they are needed

I have a hell of a lot of respect for people who are forthright and just say "You know, I don't have a lot of experience regarding , so I don't think I can weigh in on that"

it amazes me how seldom people are brave enough to admit they don't know something.

I think it's better to be quiet on a matter you don't understand.

About pineapple pizza? Yes. About Nazis? No.

I would argue that if you recognize you lack the knowledge to form an opinion, you’re doing better than 90% of people online.

Can I have your opinion on the weather on Raxacoricofallapatorians right now?

• You've never heard of it? Absolutely fair that you don't have an opinion then.
• You don't care? Also fair not to have an opinion.
• You haven't bothered to stay up to date with Slitheen weather politics? Fair, no need to have an opinion.
• You just don't want to form an opinion, just cuz? Yep, fair, no opinion it is.

Heck, you can have an opinion and just go "fuck it, no I am not sharing it". That's also fine.

Deciding to ignore something that causes people to suffer because it doesn't affect you is wrong. Not having a set opinion on how to fix it is perfectly normal. Not everyone can understand the details enough to form an informed opinion. Just don't decide something isn't a problem because one group says it's not without real evidence, especially if they're the ones who created and/or benefit from the problem.

Context really matters I don't have an opinion on a lot of sports due to disinterest while other people make their opinions on sports their personality. But there are some things that people should have opinions on even if that opinion is 'leave it to the experts'.

Having an opinion that is terrible might be worse than not having an opinion at all. For example, not having an opinion about other races would be better than having racist opinions.

I think what you are really asking is if people should have opinions about the things that affect them. Yes, they should have opinions about those things.

I got a hell of a lot smarter when I allowed myself to not have opinions on things. Like if a friend asks me if I have heard of [thing], I am nowadays much better at saying "No, I havent, tell me more" or "I'm not sure. It sounds familiar though. Remind me?". A big part of this is being in spaces where it feels safe enough to be vulnerable in saying "I don't know".

It's ok to not have an opinion, and also ok to be ambivalent about something.

Your time and attention are not unlimited resources.

Certain things are OK to not have a political opinion on. Example: Taxes are complicated and most people don't understand them; most probably want to pay less of them but do not really need to put their limited political energy to focusing on them.
That applies to most nonpolitical subjects too... most things to have an opinion on like food, movies, music whatever, are generally of little consequence.

Things that affect the base existence of large swaths of the population, aka human rights, are not something a living citizen can admit a "don't care" opinion on. You either want to live free or you don't, and having no opinion on such is how you end up without the legal right to any opinions..

The key to both is to have a complete information stream before forming any opinion or comitting to not having one. I do a nonzero amount of research even before writing a lot of comments here on Lemmy to make sure my facts are straight, and maybe 40% of the time discover it's either not worth my time to write, or I was initially wrong and my comment shouldn't be made.

Polite society - "Never, ever discuss politics or religion. Thinking that you can change someone's mind on either of these subjects is foolish and arrogant and the conversation will always, without fail, end in an argument"

Americans for some fucking reason - "Hold my high fructose corn syrup"

Yes. I think it's good not to form opinions about subjects you don't know much about.

When it comes to voting in an election, it's possible to make good decisions about candidates without forming opinions about every policy issue. That's kind of the point of representative democracy.

It depends on what the opinion is on If you don't have an opinion on whether strawberry or raspberry jam makes no difference

But if it's something that affects you or people you care about (or people you should care about) and you don't form an opinion that reflects badly

On something, yeah. On everything? No.

I don't think it is truly possible to lack an opinion. Indifference is the opposite of caring, and therefore the opposite of both love and hate at the same time. Indifference is an acceptable state of mind, but it is still an opinion. I will postulate, as silly as it is in extreme abstraction, that the opposite of opinion is only possible in death. Existence itself implies a state of awareness and opinion on abstracted levels of consciousness.

I'd say that if you do have an opinion and state an opinion on something, then you should also know enough to explain why.

Specifically about politics, it's scary how many people have an opinion without knowing why. Politics is also something that everyone should have an opinion on, because it affects pretty much everything, so everyone do have an interest in something political. It shouldn't be based on feelings or the charisma of the candidate or group pressure. It should be based on what affects you and how you'd want it done.

"I don't know enough on the topic to have an opinion."... is what I use. I'll even use that if I just don't want to talk about something with someone I know doesn't know the topic

It's fine to not have an opinion. It's even fine to have an opinion and keep it to yourself. No-one has the right to an argument with you, after all.

It's fine to not have an opinion as long as you aren't making a decision based on that ignorance

short answer: yes

long answer: opinions are kind of a privilege. if you're someone working 9 to 5 you probably couldn't give a shit about anything other than relaxing and winding down from the stress of a work week. if you're someone who manages to still be involved, congrats. pushing this unto other people imo is not fair. ideally people would work less and have more free time to get situated with how their surroundings are being legislated

Personally, I think that, when it comes to "important" stuff, having an individual or group whose opinion you trust based on other aligned values is sufficient.

E.g., if you're not sure how to feel about furries, but you respect the consensus of the queer community, you can look to them to decide how to ensure your actions/words align with your values

This is basically the whole point of electing representatives. It's not your job to have an opinion on every single thing- we hire people with whom our values (ideally) align, and it becomes their job to have all those opinions

This works similarly in elections. Many people don't have the time, energy, and/or capacity to sit down and learn about each proposed amendment/etc, so different groups publish their recommendations

NSFW
https://youtu.be/LBBni_-tMNs#t=49s

Moral of the story, if you don't have an opinion, other people will have that opinion for you.

I think it depends on what you may or may not have an opinion about.

Extreme example: if you don't have an opinion about nazis, you might be a nazi

I have no strong feelings either way

Lets abstract it a bit and turn it around: should every person immediately have on opinion on any subject or statement as soon as they learn about it? Even if they know absolutely nothing about it, or worse only know falsehoods?

If you think no, then people indeed do not need to have an opinion on something.

I don’t care whether it’s OK or not

That's a good question. I'd say be aware what you're ignorant about. Most people are ignorant. They have strong opinions about one conflict in the Middle East while they simultaneously ignore ongoing genocides in Africa. And my question is, does it help anyone if we argue with relatives or on the internet? I'd say it's alright to say I don't take sides, it's a shitty situation but not my field of expertise, so I don't have an opinion.

It's rarely a bad thing to be informed about things. And you always need information/education to make good decisions. Especially as a citizen in a democracy, it's your duty to elect your leaders, so you better have some idea about who's going to ruin the country and who's going to make it better. But that doesn't mean you have to know everything. And it also doesn't mean you need to blast your opinion out there.

And it's okay to be tired of US politics. Due to current circumstances. However, it shouldn't be that way. We learn about history and politics (in school) for a good reason. We're a part of the world and a part of what's going on.

It can be very harmful to act on an uninformed opinion. There's also simply too much out there to be informed on everything, so logically there should be lots of things you aren't able to have a valid opinion on.

People frequently get around this by finding people they think they can trust, and borrowing their "informed opinion" on things. But this can also be risky, and easily leads to groups with highly polarized opinions (political parties, etc). Even borrowing scientific/expert "opinions" on things can lead you astray, as we've seen with many of the funded studies on food health. Two experts can easily have conflicting opinions on something, with strong arguments/evidence to back up their stance.

So basically having completely uninformed opinions is dangerous, it's not possible to learn everything well enough to have a good opinion on it, and borrowing others opinions on things only works some of the time. So it's probably best to accept that you shouldn't have a strong opinion on most things, and to be always willing to re-evaluate your opinions if you run into evidence that refutes your current opinions.

Caught in this battle so often, never forgot it when I saw/read it in the Witcher series (games/books) - this is some of the core things about the series. Gerald must pick a side and he doesn't.