A Quote by Marilyn vos Savant

Be able to defend your arguments in a rational way. Otherwise, all you have is an opinion. — © Marilyn vos Savant
Be able to defend your arguments in a rational way. Otherwise, all you have is an opinion.
In a discussion, the difficulty lies, not in being able to defend your opinion, but to know it.
If you just try to make rational arguments about why people should care about Congo and how 5 million people have died, then people tend not to be receptive. But once you've created a connection of empathy, rational arguments can play a supportive role.
I'm able to defend. A lot of guys don't have that willingness to defend and I think as a guard who's undersized - that's what everybody says; I'm undersized - I'm able to defend and willing to defend and bring that.
Political ideas that have dominated the public mind for decades cannot be refuted through rational arguments. They must run their course in life and cannot collapse otherwise than in great catastrophe.
Everyone should have their own opinion and be able to voice it. No matter what it is. Of course, that does not mean your opinion is always right. But, you're certainly entitled to your opinion.
Rational arguments don't usually work on religious people. Otherwise, there wouldn't be religious people.
If you desire to be pure, have firm faith, and slowly go on with your devotional practices without wasting your energy in useless scriptural discussions and arguments. Your little brain will otherwise be muddled.
Respect for another man's opinion is worthy. It is the realization that any opinion is valuable, for it is the sign of a rational being.
Don't get in arguments with your coaches. If you have a certain opinion, express it to the best of your ability. But don't get on his bad side.
I don't know who the great lawyers are, and I presume you can't get to them. I know of no case where it can be said for certain that they took part. They defend some people, but you can't get them to do that through your own efforts, they only defend the ones they want to defend. But I assume a case they take on must have progressed beyond the lower court. It's better not to think of them at all, otherwise you'll find the consultations with the other lawyers, their advice and their assistance, extremely disgusting and useless.
People who reject transcendent authority can no longer persuade one another through rational arguments; everything is reduced to personal opinion. Debates about ideas thus degenerate into power struggles; we're left with no moral standard by which to measure the common good. For that matter, how can there be a 'common good' without an objective standard of truth?
Freedom of speech is about expressing your opinion, however bad or good, however right or wrong, and being able to defend it and argue it and be argued with about it in public forums. But that's not what academic freedom is about. That's not what the classroom is about.
This formidable censor of the public functionaries [the press], by arraigning them at the tribunal of public opinion, produces reform peaceably, which must otherwise be done by revolution. It is also the best instrument for enlightening the mind of man and improving him as a rational, moral, and social being.
I always believe, as a woman, it's powerful to be able to pull your own body weight and be able to defend yourself.
The case is I talk for a living, so I should be able to say anything I want to say regardless of how you feel. What we're starting to deal with now is your opinion matters, but to be quite honest, your opinion means nothing.
A nuclear war does not defend a country and it does not defend a system. I've put it the same way many times; not even the most accomplished ideologue will be able to tell the difference between the ashes of capitalism and the ashes of communism.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!