Is there a "correct" set of criteria for classifying "opinions" (e.g. based on accuracy)?
The concept of opinion is more diverse than subjective:
- "opinions" can evolve to as far as scientifically backed facts.
- "opinions" can exist as strong group beliefs (such as anti-slavery)
- an expert opinion should be distinguished from a non-expert opinion
Thus merely "an opinion" is a very limited view on information. But there's a reason to ask for more criteria to be added for opinions, because otherwise rising beyond subjective or "the worst opinion" would make little sense.
Some practical concern:
For example, if media is still "an opinion", then not much of "general sorts" (more objective) could be said. Thus people who write articles, may be wasting their time. Because e.g. the choice about "what to write about" is still subjective. The way it's written contains subjectivity (word usage for example).
But does/can there exist a "correct" set of criteria for opinions? That is, a categorization/classification system for opinions, which can distinguish between their accuracies?
Initially one'd think that maybe not, since the criteria may deviate between individuals.
But there are examples, when they coincide. Thus there exists some criteria, but none of them is necessarily the ultimate one.
But then when one starts to compare criteria, they may form hierarchical relationships. Scientific criteria ought to be more valid than religious criteria. And then one could say that "scientific criteria is (more) correct".
But this may again fall to at most group subjective. So then would a reasonable view on opinions be:
subjective or group subjective beliefs that have varied measure for truth/accuracy
But what can one reference that truth/accuracy against? To compare to something better, doesn't it mean that one may have to "lock" the "correct criteria" as reference? How is the "legitimacy" of this locking motivated? On subjective basis? But what about views that concern more than the subject?
What could be the "best" epistemologies of our current times? That can serve as references?
If one "valuates" people differently based on e.g. education, physical features etc. Then how are these to be "accurized"? Some would claim them as "mere opinion", whereas basing on cultural research, things such as attractiveness and fitness as well as "achievement" do have general cultural patterns. Thus, for accuracy, it feels an underestimation to treat them as "mere opinions". Rather, they could be called "informed opinions", with some caution with not being too subjective. While being a questionable topic (since people possibly hate being judged), I think it can serve as an every day example of the difference between "mere opinion" and "some more".