Feeling, Opinion and Reality

LI:  If a person is trapped in an escape room for hours and can't escape.  He says 'he feels his only option is to destroy the room'.  Is that his feeling, or is that his opinion?  Does that reflect reality?

VAL:  I guess you are saying the escape room does have a way out.  But if the person feels his only option is to destroy the room, then that is his reality.

LI:  The person says 'he feels his only option is to destroy the room'.  This statement includes his feeling and opinion.  He feels he is trapped and confused.  Then he forms an opinion that there is no way out.  Based on false belief, the person concludes he needs to destroy the room.  His opinion is wrong though. There is a way out.

VAL:  OK.  I accept the reality is that there is a way out of the room.  However, if the person feels the outside world is still a prison, then isn't it true that his only option is to destroy the room?

LI:   Destroying the room does not make the world better, it makes it worse.  If the person feels the outside world is a prison, then by destroying the room, he creates chaos, but he will still feel trapped. 

VAL:  The person may believe that by creating more chaos, the people in power will change the world for the better.

LI:  There are others who do not share the feelings of that person though.  Those people may feel the world is a paradise and not a prison.  The person, by creating chaos, is destroying other people's paradise.  If the world is changed to what the person wants, then other people are entitled to do the same and the vicious cycle continues.  Therefore, by conflating feeling, opinion and reality, and by resorting to destruction as the way to change things, is a recipe for chaos.

VAL:  Can we separate feeling, opinion and reality?

LI:  For the situation of the escape room, the physical reality is that there is in fact an escape route.  People should recognise that it is natural that we can feel trapped and confused at times.  However, we need to gather facts, look at the evidence, and rationally determine what is real and what action, if any, should be taken.

VAL:  What if the person cannot trust the 'facts', nor can he accept what experts say, or the experts disagree?  Aren't there situations that the person has to rely on his feelings?

LI:  People should recognise that when reality cannot be determined objectively, there are other people who may feel differently about the situation.   People should accept that they do not know the reality in that situation.

VAL:  I agree that there are many things that we do not know; and feelings can be misleading.  A good salesperson can make us feel good and buy a terrible used car.

LI:  I hope more people recognise feelings can be misleading; whereas opinions and actions based on evidence and rational analysis of reality are much more likely to be correct.


Note:  This is a fictional dialogue.  Val and Li are fictional characters.  Val migrated to Australia some years ago but returned to Hong Kong last year.  She lives in Hong Kong now and visits Australia occasionally.  Li was a former resident of Hong Kong but makes Melbourne his home now.  Photos are by Andrik Langfield and Leon Liu on Unsplash.

   

Whose fault is it?

Val migrated to Australia some years ago but returned to Hong Kong last year.  She lives in Hong Kong now and visits Australia occasionally.  Li was a former resident of Hong Kong but makes Melbourne his home now.

LI:  Protesters have become increasingly violent in Hong Kong.  They set fire to buildings, vandalised train stations, attacked police with bricks, steel rods, petrol bombs and more.  A police officer was slashed in the neck with what looks like a box cutter from behind.  How can you still support this sort of violent protest?

VAL:  No.  I don't support violence.  However, I believe the crux of the problem lies in a mediocre and incompetent Hong Kong government, turning a group of ideally motivated citizens into mobs.

LI:  Are you saying it is not the violent protesters' fault?

VAL: It is the government's fault.  The young protesters feel that they don't have other options but to take up violent protest.  The government has ignored their plea.  They feel that violent protest is the only way that the government will listen.

LI:  A person's decision to do something is affected by many factors: his personality, his training, influences from friends etc.  Is it fair to say that the protester's decision to commit violence is solely caused by the government?

VAL:  I accept there are the other factors, but the government's behaviour was the deciding factor.

LI:  So you are saying in spite of the person's personality, training etc. when they were faced with the situation, they didn't have any choice.

VAL: Yes.

LI:  Shouldn't the same rationale apply to government officials?  According to your rationale, they could not have done otherwise.  They had to do what they did.

VAL:  Perhaps the situation is different - the protesters don't have options, while the government does have options.

LI:  Let's look at your argument.

Premise 1:  [Protesters] want [certain demands]
Premise 2:  [Government officials] do not agree to [certain demands]
Conclusion: [Protesters] feel they must resort to [violence]

For the government, a similar argument can be put.

Premise 1: [Government officials] want [extradition law]
Premise 2: [Protesters] do not agree to [extradition law]
Conclusion: [Government officials] feel they must resort to [pushing the bill through]
     
Similarly
     
Premise 1: [Government officials] want [peaceful protest]
Premise 2: [Protesters] do not agree to [peaceful protest]
Conclusion: [Government officials] feel they must resort to [suppression]

These arguments look the same.  If the first argument is sound, shouldn't the other two arguments be sound as well?

VAL:  I am not sure, but if we accept that people do not have free will, then all your arguments have to be true.

LI:  If people accept there is no free will, then it is easier for them to let go of hatred.  Why hate others when they have no choice?

VAL:  Let us hope there will be more kindness and less hatred in Hong Kong.

LI:  Perhaps some people in Hong Kong can draw inspiration from Laozi, who says:

"I treat those who are kind with kindness.
I treat those who are not kind also with kindness.
This is the kindness that is consistent with Dao."
" 善者吾善之，不善者吾亦善之，德善。"