Wallmart the Movie! please no flame war..

[Juno]

"Pushing" your opinion as an absolute early in the debate is a mistake because it allows you no room to admit error later without looking foolish and that can make one intractable.
Roger

Hmm..... I always thought that there was something wishy washy about the way you weaseled your way through arguments and somehow put on an air of "winning" them with a certain amount of backpeddling. Just my observation

[MovieStuff]

"Pushing" your opinion as an absolute early in the debate is a mistake because it allows you no room to admit error later without looking foolish and that can make one intractable.
Roger

Hmm..... I always thought that there was something wishy washy about the way you weaseled your way through arguments and somehow put on an air of "winning" them with a certain amount of backpeddling. Just my observation

Are you referring to me?

Roger

[Evan Kubota]

Tim, if the books are really filled with so many strong arguments you should surely be able to summarize one or two on this website. If you actually read the books and they actually contained arguments that wouldn't be shot to pieces within a few minutes, that is. Don't make things more difficult than they really are.

Telling anyone who disagrees with you to go out and buy books on the topic before discussing it is absurd.

Your flippant and dismissive attitude regarding "exploring" topics "further" is also absurd. What research have you done other than reading three anti-Wal-Mart books?

Why would examining the same "evidence" as you did add anything to my opinion?

You say

"So? I don't get the importance of conceding this. Please re-read this comment--it is essentially meaningless."

but you obviously haven't grasped what my initial statement meant. In case you can't scroll up - your opinion is no more valid than any other opinion.

[Alex]

I don't feel strongly enough about the 'evil of Wal-Mart' to buy books just to research it, that's for sure. There are many kinds of evidence. Yours are no more valid than any others, and none can be taken objectively.

"There are many kinds of evidence"...."none can be taken objectively".....

Isn't that taking the easy way out?

Whether you do or not, I'll continue to pay half the price for K40 processing (not including shipping!) that you and others like you insist on spending.

Tim, if the books are really filled with so many strong arguments you should surely be able to summarize one or two on this website.

But you obviously haven't grasped what my initial statement meant. In case you can't scroll up - your opinion is no more valid than any other opinion.

In my opinion Tim's position is more valid than yours in this instance because the foundation of YOUR viewpoint is....

.....if YOU derive pleasure and convenience from a service or institution, YOU choose not to question it's ethical standards.

Once you take that postion for the foundation of your position, your position, in my opinion, is not as valid as someone willing to do research and then make a "sacrifice" as a result of that research.

There's nothing wrong with having a less passionate opinion, as long as you don't use that position to flount someone who has taken the issue more seriously than you.

[etimh]

Why would examining the same "evidence" as you did add anything to my opinion?

Its called learning.

I doubt that anyone can consume every bit of information on a given topic. But exposing oneself to as many varied viewpoints as possible is an admirable goal, I would think. I've outlined what I believe to be the harmful effects of Walmart's business practices several times in other threads. I can't imagine boring people any further with this list of grievances. If, and I repeat, if you care, you can go back and read these.

I've come to these opinions based on what I believe to be a fair and broad-based survey of the available documentation and scholarship on the topic. This includes four full-length books, three of which could be considered "against" Walmart and one in support. All are published by legitimate publishers and penned by well-known respected journalists and academics.

Furthermore, after my first exposure to the issue, I've gone on to have many personal encounters with individuals who have worked at Walmart (through my work in union representation) and individuals and families in a threatened community (I was involved in the campaign to resist the building of a Walmart in the South Central area of Los Angeles). This is the only experience or evidence I can claim to have. Its cumulative value, however, has turned out to be sufficient in making decisions and forming my opinion.

What I simply cannot grasp is this almost irrational resistance to even the suggestion of examining the multiplicity of arguments around this issue. I can only imagine this peculiar opposition to the possibility of changing one's perspective has less to do with the issue itself and more to do with somehow being oppositional for the sake of it. Regardless, it indicates an intransigence and lack of intellectual curiosity that is perplexing and frankly, uninteresting.

I am so done with this, sorry.

Tim

[monobath]

Inspired by Tim's cool tag line, "There is no authority but yourself.", I came up with one too. "Self-ownership: I rule me, you rule you."

It's not that my new sig is especially relevant to this discussion, Tim, but I just wanted you to know that you inspired me.

[MovieStuff]

What I simply cannot grasp is this almost irrational resistance to even the suggestion of examining the multiplicity of arguments around this issue.

Yes, I agree 100%. For someone to see their own opinion as more valid when it is impossible to know everything about a given subject is the height of absurdity.

There's nothing wrong with having a less passionate opinion, as long as you don't use that position to flount someone who has taken the issue more seriously than you.

An opinion based on passion is no more valid than an opinion based on apathy. They're both just opinions. To tell anyone that they need to do more research or they can't form the correct opinion presumes that the current opposing opinion is already proven to be wrong. There are no "wrong" or "right" opinions. That's why they are called "opinions" and not "facts".

Roger

[Juno]

"Pushing" your opinion as an absolute early in the debate is a mistake because it allows you no room to admit error later without looking foolish and that can make one intractable.
Roger

Hmm..... I always thought that there was something wishy washy about the way you weaseled your way through arguments and somehow put on an air of "winning" them with a certain amount of backpeddling. Just my observation

Are you referring to me?

Roger

Yes, but I don't hate the player, I just hate the game. It is really a shame that so many people feel the preasure to play it though. But I guess as a business man it is important for you to establish credibility. It's all a part of the marketing!

[Alex]

What I simply cannot grasp is this almost irrational resistance to even the suggestion of examining the multiplicity of arguments around this issue.

Yes, I agree 100%. For someone to see their own opinion as more valid when it is impossible to know everything about a given subject is the height of absurdity.

There's nothing wrong with having a less passionate opinion, as long as you don't use that position to flount someone who has taken the issue more seriously than you.

An opinion based on passion is no more valid than an opinion based on apathy. They're both just opinions. To tell anyone that they need to do more research or they can't form the correct opinion presumes that the current opposing opinion is already proven to be wrong. There are no "wrong" or "right" opinions. That's why they are called "opinions" and not "facts".

Roger

Maybe you are implying "blind" passion. In that case I would agree. However if someone has taken the time to intelligently research an issue than that would have more legitimacy than either blind passion or apathy.

[Evan Kubota]

"I can only imagine this peculiar opposition to the possibility of changing one's perspective has less to do with the issue itself and more to do with somehow being oppositional for the sake of it."

On the contrary - you're the one who has been insinuating that others should re-align their opinions to be closer to yours, and suggesting that anyone who read the books that you mentioned would likely arrive at a similar conclusion.

I could care less what you do with your exposed film. However, unlike you, I understand what an opinion is. I understand that the amount of subjective "research" conducted for whatever purpose does nothing to increase the validity of that opinion. This argument will continue for the foreseeable future as long as you continue to maintain that some opinions are somehow more valid than others.

[monobath]

However if someone has taken the time to intelligently research an issue than that would have more legitimacy than either blind passion or apathy.

Of course, two people can examine (intelligently research) the same data and reach entirely different conclusions. Unless it is a matter of indisputable fact, one cannot say that one conclusion is absolutely right and another is absolutely wrong. Our unique experiences, individual perspective, and personal values all help to influence our conclusions.

[MovieStuff]

Are you referring to me?

Roger

Yes, but I don't hate the player, I just hate the game. It is really a shame that so many people feel the preasure to play it though.

While I do enjoy a good debate, I take exception to your description of "weasling" my way through a debate or "backpeddling". I would love to see some examples, if you have the time, because that is news to me!

I consider myself to be a conscientious and intelligent debater. If someone proves me wrong, I think that's great because I generally learn something new but I never back peddle and I always make a distinction between what I present as fact or opinion.

But I guess as a business man it is important for you to establish credibility. It's all a part of the marketing!

On the contrary, I go out of my way to seperate my business from my personal views on this forum. However, while I have no problem forgetting that I might have a higher profile, some others can't seem to ignore it as easily. As such, some of my statements take on a more significant meaning to someone that I might be having a heated discussion with and that can make them feel unduly threatened and belligerent or that I am somehow trying to capitalize on my status, however that might be defined. Because I am an easy target for false charges of being too heavy handed, it is actually essential that I keep my arguments as fair and even handed as possible. If you see that as "wishy washy", then I apologize, but I really don't know any other way to operate.

Roger

[etimh]

However, unlike you, I understand what an opinion is. I understand that the amount of subjective "research" conducted for whatever purpose does nothing to increase the validity of that opinion. This argument will continue for the foreseeable future as long as you continue to maintain that some opinions are somehow more valid than others.

Evan, do you honestly believe that I do not understand what an "opinion" is? C'mon, at least maintain some integrity in your argumentation by avoiding these kinds of ridiculous assertions. I understand both the definition and the connotation of the term "opinion," comprehending fully the implication of its subjective quality. I have, in fact, made a career (literally, not figuratively) in comprehending the relative and subjective nature of knowledge and the contingency of percieved "truths."

But I also accept that by the process of deductive reasoning, based on a set of established facts, that conclusions can be reached which help to support the validity of particular opinions. This is the process that I think you fail to understand. For instance, I can say that it is my "opinion" that the earth is a sphere. Someone could attempt to discredit this "opinion" by making claims that it is arbitrary, subjective, or relative. But the fact of the matter is that there is a body of objective evidence that determines deductive conclusions which, in turn, can lend credence to my "opinion."

On the other hand, you may express the "opinion" that the earth is flat. This also could be identified as a view that is arbitrary, subjective, or relative. But without one shred of objective evidence to support any such deduction, this "opinion" is of an entirely different nature. It becomes, in and of itself, a belief based on abstractions such as faith, speculation, or dogma.

For whatever personal reasons of your own which I have yet failed to identify, you have now moved so far away from the original issue that you have resorted purely to a discussion of semantics. Yet again, I will reiterate that I have no desire to "change" your views, beliefs, or even your "opinion." But I will not shrink from passing judgement on your actions, which I feel derive clearly either from defiant self-interest or gross ignorance of the facts. I can't do anything about the selfishness but I did think, perhaps naively, that I could help you out with the latter by suggesting some further resources.

I look forward to continuing this "argument" for as long as you wish to pursue it.

Tim

[david]

excuse me, I know nothing of walmart since I live in Italy, so I'm not taking any side in this discussion, but I'd say that there are indeed wrong and right opinions, since they always lead to actions.The point is we can't judge opinions, of course, but when they become actions ("facts") things change a bit. Forming an opinion without carefully researching the subject can be quite dangerous, IMO.

[Evan Kubota]

"On the other hand, you may express the "opinion" that the earth is flat. This also could be identified as a view that is arbitrary, subjective, or relative. But without one shred of objective evidence to support any such deduction, this "opinion" is of an entirely different nature. It becomes, in and of itself, a belief based on abstractions such as faith, speculation, or dogma."

Terrible analogy. Is there any objective, scientific proof that Wal-Mart is what you say it is?

You say you have no desire to change my beliefs, but "passing judgement" wouldn't even enter into this unless you believed your own positions and actions were superior to mine. There's absolutely no objective basis for you to make that claim, but you can draw circles in the sand as much as you want.

If you "feel" my opinion stems from defiant self-interest, fine. You can interpret my actions however you want to - but it might be worth nothing that your interpretation is only that.