Okay. I'll clarify a little teensy bit but then I'm serious, I'm not gonna do this. You're right. Opinions aren't objective and they can't be. But you know what opinions can totally be? Stupid. An opinion can be stupid and poorly founded. 9/11 truthers and anti-vaxxers have opinions that are stupid and should be changed if possible and disregarded if not. You can't defend a dumb argument by sayng it's an opinion, and that's what YOU do.
.
You all up in the kool aid breh , and have no idea its actually cyanide. There was no real orginal argument I just presented a case for why people might like , actually he person who defaulted to the " well I was just saying this is my opinion thing " was the other person. I only argued the definition of objective, the other person saying and I quote
Then what decides whether something is good or bad to you? Because he's badly written, has no development, and is just unlikable. I don't know what else is needed to make him objectively bad.
Which was the person trying to present their subjective opinions as objective. I don't give a shit if people think yosuke is bad. He's not naoto , what i was arguing whether that was objective. Which it isn't by definition of the word.
But please, please tell me more about the situation you weren't paying attention to
He's not talking about that. He's talking about how most arguments you are involved in boil down to you saying that other people are wrong because it's just their opinion.
The argument, we were having wasn't about whether you were right or wrong. I never said you were right or wrong.
I never actually argued you . I just presented a case for why people might like yosuke. The only argument that happened was when you decided that your opinion could be objective. Which is just a language argument. And which is again, not really an argument because words mean things