Facts

[fw102807]

I believe “facts” can be manipulated, misinterpreted or just plain wrong. “Facts” are simply a conclusion based on a certain set of evidence. This evidence can be accurate or not based on how it is collected and by whom. “Fact” is not equal to absolute truth and considering all ideas, opinions and possibilities is the basis for critical thinking. I am tired of having these “facts” rammed down my throat by people who are intolerant, closed minded and think they are infallible. I am using a link to support this idea. If you don’t like it I really don’t care. It’s my opinion and I am entitled to it. Facts are not always more important than opinions: here's why (https://theconversation.com/facts-are-not-always-more-important-than-opinions-heres-why-76020)

[Taltarzac725]

I believe “facts” can be manipulated, misinterpreted or just plain wrong. “Facts” are simply a conclusion based on a certain set of evidence. This evidence can be accurate or not based on how it is collected and by whom. “Fact” is not equal to absolute truth and considering all ideas, opinions and possibilities is the basis for critical thinking. I am tired of having these “facts” rammed down my throat by people who are intolerant, closed minded and think they are infallible. I am using a link to support this idea. If you don’t like it I really don’t care. It’s my opinion and I am entitled to it. Facts are not always more important than opinions: here's why (https://theconversation.com/facts-are-not-always-more-important-than-opinions-heres-why-76020)

You seem to be becoming a philosopher. Take a look at some of David Hume's writings. Top 10 David Hume Quotes - BrainyQuote (https://www.brainyquote.com/lists/authors/top_10_david_hume_quotes)

David Hume - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hume)

Hume Texts Online (https://davidhume.org/)

It's when we start working together that the real healing takes place... it's when we start spilling our sweat, and not our blood. David Hume
Read more at: David Hume - It's when we start working together that the... (https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/david_hume_389827)

[Bucco]

I believe “facts” can be manipulated, misinterpreted or just plain wrong. “Facts” are simply a conclusion based on a certain set of evidence. This evidence can be accurate or not based on how it is collected and by whom. “Fact” is not equal to absolute truth and considering all ideas, opinions and possibilities is the basis for critical thinking. I am tired of having these “facts” rammed down my throat by people who are intolerant, closed minded and think they are infallible. I am using a link to support this idea. If you don’t like it I really don’t care. It’s my opinion and I am entitled to it. Facts are not always more important than opinions: here's why (https://theconversation.com/facts-are-not-always-more-important-than-opinions-heres-why-76020)

You seem quite full of anger, and in your anger are talking past the point I try to make.

I am not a philosopher, and that seems to be your direction. And your link, quite frankly was interesting, but if in anyway it is meant to dissuade me, or anyone from wanting facts or searching for truth, it falls seriously short.

On this forum, and in the real world it is quite simple to recognize lying or manipulation of truth. Can we discuss philosophy of truth ? Certainly but that has never, nor can I envision it ever being discussed.

You speak to people "ramming" things down your throat, while I consider it human courtesy that if you are giving your OPINION, based on an occurrence or a settlement, then as a reader I certainly deserve to know about the occurrence, etc. I hope I do not fall short when discussing REAL things, I supply from where I got my basis for an opinion.

You are over thinking the common practice of lying, or deceiving.

If you post on here that PERSON A did not say this or that, and I produce a video of that person saying it, then you lied to everyone in the forum. Of course, we find in today's age that those videos can and are manipulated and that is a caution. If you say something, and it is your opinion on something or somebody, in my world you should supply what generated your opinion. That is civil discourse, and disagreements are based on differing OPINIONS. There can be no civil discourse if based on lies.....flat out impossible

I would always avoid someone who lies, and that is always my premise. I have NEVER questioned an opinion based on truth, disagreed maybe, but never questioned or dismissed.

I may be misunderstanding you, and not sure why you, or anyone would be angry as you seem to be because someone asked you to back up comments.

I am not putting words in your mouth, but you seem to be giving carte blanc approval to misstate things, or lie to people simply because of some philosophical feeling about defining truth.

I can say, with almost 100% accuracy that a liar is a liar. Whether lying by omission or flat out telling things that are not true.

The discussion you are trying to begin is philosophical, and well beyond me. I am sorry for whatever sparked such anger, but I have found in my 80 years that lying is lying.....most know it, and you "appear" to be trying to legitimize someone lying to you.

If this is meant to be philosophical rather than simple human behavior, I apologize. I subscribe to the philosophy of KISS.....and still, perhaps naively that A lie is an assertion that is believed to be false, typically used with the purpose of deceiving someone.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Opinion: I love the color of the sky.
Fact: The sky is blue.

Opinion: This dress makes me look fat.
Fact: I am fat.

Opinion: green-eyed people are all lazy.
Fact: there is no biological difference in inherent motivational behavior between green-eyed people and people with any other color eyes.

Opinion: The guy who rammed his golf cart into the Walmart glass door should be in jail.
Fact: The guy who rammed his golf cart into the pickup truck had a defective gas pedal. He committed no crime but he will ultimately be held responsible for the cost to replace the door.

Opinion: I like bees.
Fact: Bees are insects.
Also fact: The person who likes bees in the opinion above is not allergic to bees.

Learn to distinguish between fact and opinion. One is not always necessary in conjunction with the other, but if one is opining about something that can be proven factually correct or incorrect, then one should make some minimal attempt to determine which is which, before expressing one's opinion.

[Nucky]

Max Cady, Cape Fear. Cleaned up for a Family Audience. "I’m better than you all! I can out-learn you. I can out-read you. I can out-think you and I can out-philosophize you! And I’m gonna outlast you. Do you think a couple of whacks to my good-ole-boy guts is gonna get me down? It’s gonna take a lot more’n that, counsellor, to prove you’re better’n me!”

FW you are on the money. Perfecto!

[Velvet]

Interesting... so what exactly are ‘facts’? Are they a definition of something like the wavelength of the color blue, or are they something a lot of people agree on such as in Columbus’ time that the earth was flat. Or are you referring to juried articles in academic journals?

In my opinion ‘facts’ are mostly personal perceptions;

From Wiki:
Blind men and the elephant.

Blind Men Appraising an Elephant by Ohara Donshu, Edo Period (early 19th century), Brooklyn Museum
The parable of the blind men and an elephant originated in the ancient Indian subcontinent, from where it has been widely diffused. However the meaning of the popular proverb differs in other countries. It is a story of a group of blind men, who have never come across an elephant before and who learn and conceptualize what the elephant is like by touching it. Each blind man feels a different part of the elephant's body, but only one part, such as the side or the tusk. They then describe the elephant based on their limited experience and their descriptions of the elephant are different from each other. In some versions, they come to suspect that the other person is dishonest and they come to blows. The moral of the parable is that humans have a tendency to claim absolute truth based on their limited, subjective experience as they ignore other people's limited, subjective experiences which may be equally true.

[ColdNoMore]

FACT (poke here) (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/fact)

noun

something that actually exists; reality; truth: Your fears have no basis in fact.

something known to exist or to have happened: Space travel is now a fact.

a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true: Scientists gather facts about plant growth.
something said to be true or supposed to have happened: The facts given by the witness are highly questionable.

Law. Often facts. an actual or alleged event or circumstance, as distinguished from its legal effect or consequence.


OPINION (poke here) (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/opinion?s=t)

noun

a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.

a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.

the formal expression of a professional judgment: to ask for a second medical opinion.

Law. the formal statement by a judge or court of the reasoning and the principles of law used in reaching a decision of a case.
a judgment or estimate of a person or thing with respect to character, merit, etc.: to forfeit someone's good opinion.
a favorable estimate; esteem:


It really shouldn't be that complicated, and wouldn't be, if people really cared and bothered to do even a modicum of research...regarding which is which. :ohdear:

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Interesting... so what exactly are ‘facts’? Are they a definition of something like the wavelength of the color blue, or are they something a lot of people agree on such as in Columbus’ time that the earth was flat. Or are you referring to juried articles in academic journals?

In my opinion ‘facts’ are mostly personal perceptions;

From Wiki:
Blind men and the elephant.

Blind Men Appraising an Elephant by Ohara Donshu, Edo Period (early 19th century), Brooklyn Museum
The parable of the blind men and an elephant originated in the ancient Indian subcontinent, from where it has been widely diffused. However the meaning of the popular proverb differs in other countries. It is a story of a group of blind men, who have never come across an elephant before and who learn and conceptualize what the elephant is like by touching it. Each blind man feels a different part of the elephant's body, but only one part, such as the side or the tusk. They then describe the elephant based on their limited experience and their descriptions of the elephant are different from each other. In some versions, they come to suspect that the other person is dishonest and they come to blows. The moral of the parable is that humans have a tendency to claim absolute truth based on their limited, subjective experience as they ignore other people's limited, subjective experiences which may be equally true.

The "fact" of this, is that it is, indeed, an elephant. That fact is not disputed, it is a provable thing. Regardless of what the blind men perceive, and how they describe it, it is an elephant. It doesn't stop being an elephant just because three people describe it in three different ways.

The descriptions might even be factual: this thing is alive. It has a leathery surface. It breathes. It has some kind of long appendage that curves around my waist sometimes. All of those things are FACTS, no matter if the person telling you is blind or sighted. They are not opinions. They're facts.

What you are describing is neither fact nor opinion. It's judgment. It's applying or eliminating value to fact, opinion, or both.

[ColdNoMore]

Interesting... so what exactly are ‘facts’? Are they a definition of something like the wavelength of the color blue, or are they something a lot of people agree on such as in Columbus’ time that the earth was flat. Or are you referring to juried articles in academic journals?

In my opinion ‘facts’ are mostly personal perceptions;

From Wiki:
Blind men and the elephant.

Blind Men Appraising an Elephant by Ohara Donshu, Edo Period (early 19th century), Brooklyn Museum
The parable of the blind men and an elephant originated in the ancient Indian subcontinent, from where it has been widely diffused. However the meaning of the popular proverb differs in other countries. It is a story of a group of blind men, who have never come across an elephant before and who learn and conceptualize what the elephant is like by touching it. Each blind man feels a different part of the elephant's body, but only one part, such as the side or the tusk. They then describe the elephant based on their limited experience and their descriptions of the elephant are different from each other. In some versions, they come to suspect that the other person is dishonest and they come to blows. The moral of the parable is that humans have a tendency to claim absolute truth based on their limited, subjective experience as they ignore other people's limited, subjective experiences which may be equally true.

That's a good analogy, but maybe not in the way you intended.

In that same Wiki article is this:

The parable has been used to illustrate a range of truths and fallacies; broadly, the parable implies that one's subjective experience can be true, but that such experience is inherently limited by its failure to account for other truths or a totality of truth.

The fact that it is an elephant...is still a FACT.

That different people have taken pieces of this fact, to espouse a view that is an incorrect and skewed opinion...is exactly what happens all too often.



:ho:

[Velvet]

Yes, my question is “what is the definition of fact”? Is it something that we can independently under identical circumstances replicate over and over again?
And what is the definition of “truth”?
How do we know what we know?

OP a fact can be relative. Take the temperature of your bath water. Relative to the boiling water in the pot, the bath water is cold. Relative to the icy water in the fridge, the bath water is hot. I am guessing that’s how people manipulate “facts”.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Yes, my question is “what is the definition of fact”? Is it something that we can independently replicate over and over again?
And what is the definition of “truth”?

Fact is something that can be proven.

Truth has more than one definition. One is subjective, the others are not.

Something can be true "for you" and not be factual.

You can believe in a god made out of cream cheese, and therefore, cream-cheese god's existence will be true for you.

But its existence isn't factual, however true it might be for you. A fact is not disputable. In fact (pun intended), facts are often disputed, until all arguments against them are proven false. It's one way (of many) of discerning whether or not something is a fact.

Fact: I have 3 dimes, 2 quarters, and 4 pennies in my purse.
Now, you can call it "a lot of money" if you are a little kid who never gets any money at all. You can call it "don't insult me, keep your damned tip" if you're a waitress being stiffed on a $140 dining check. But the fact remains, it's still 84 cents. That is a fact. You can dispute it, and I'll turn my pocketbook inside out and let you cut it into pieces looking for more change. When you find there is nothing left in there, you will have proven the fact. You don't have to like it - and that would be your opinion, that you're entitled to. But your opinion won't change the fact that it's 84 cents.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Yes, my question is “what is the definition of fact”? Is it something that we can independently under identical circumstances replicate over and over again?
And what is the definition of “truth”?
How do we know what we know?

OP a fact can be relative. Take the temperature of your bath water. Relative to the boiling water in the pot, the bath water is cold. Relative to the icy water in the fridge, the bath water is hot. I am guessing that’s how people manipulate “facts”.

"Cold" vs "Hot" would be opinion, not fact. Fact would be the 105 degree temperature of the water. "Colder" and "Hotter" would be relative fact.

[Velvet]

Love your answers. Makes me think.

[Taltarzac725]

Crazy Law Facts | Law Teacher (https://www.lawteacher.net/crazy-law-facts/)

This is amusing.

Now what makes a horse "ugly"?

[BK001]

It was six men of Indostan, to learning much inclined,
who went to see the elephant (Though all of them were blind),
that each by observation, might satisfy his mind.

The first approached the elephant, and, happening to fall,
against his broad and sturdy side, at once began to bawl:
'God bless me! but the elephant, is nothing but a wall!'

The second feeling of the tusk, cried: 'Ho! what have we here,
so very round and smooth and sharp? To me tis mighty clear,
this wonder of an elephant, is very like a spear!'

The third approached the animal, and, happening to take,
the squirming trunk within his hands, 'I see,' quoth he,
the elephant is very like a snake!'

The fourth reached out his eager hand, and felt about the knee:
'What most this wondrous beast is like, is mighty plain,' quoth he;
'Tis clear enough the elephant is very like a tree.'

The fifth, who chanced to touch the ear, Said; 'E'en the blindest man
can tell what this resembles most; Deny the fact who can,
This marvel of an elephant, is very like a fan!'

The sixth no sooner had begun, about the beast to grope,
than, seizing on the swinging tail, that fell within his scope,
'I see,' quothe he, 'the elephant is very like a rope!'

And so these men of Indostan, disputed loud and long,
each in his own opinion, exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right, and all were in the wrong!

So, oft in theologic wars, the disputants, I ween,
tread on in utter ignorance, of what each other mean,
and prate about the elephant, not one of them has seen!

John Godfrey Saxe

[Taltarzac725]

Mark Twain quotations - Facts (http://www.twainquotes.com/Facts.html)

Mark Twain and facts.

Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please.
- quoted by Rudyard Kipling in From Sea to Shining Sea

[ColdNoMore]

Snip...>Though each was partly in the right, and all were in the wrong!<...Snip

Which ties into my earlier post where I said... "different people have taken pieces of this fact, to espouse a view that is an incorrect and skewed opinion...."

Had each man been allowed to touch the entire elephant (analogous to researching), their 'opinion' would then more closely align with the fact...that it is an elephant.

It's also a good example of why researching is so important, if someone is actually interested in getting to the truth/fact(s)...versus just going with some "gut-feeling."

Because no matter their opinion (which was based on their limited/incomplete knowledge), the fact that it was an elephant...doesn't change. :shrug:

[jebartle]

You seem quite full of anger, and in your anger are talking past the point I try to make.

I am not a philosopher, and that seems to be your direction. And your link, quite frankly was interesting, but if in anyway it is meant to dissuade me, or anyone from wanting facts or searching for truth, it falls seriously short.

On this forum, and in the real world it is quite simple to recognize lying or manipulation of truth. Can we discuss philosophy of truth ? Certainly but that has never, nor can I envision it ever being discussed.

You speak to people "ramming" things down your throat, while I consider it human courtesy that if you are giving your OPINION, based on an occurrence or a settlement, then as a reader I certainly deserve to know about the occurrence, etc. I hope I do not fall short when discussing REAL things, I supply from where I got my basis for an opinion.

You are over thinking the common practice of lying, or deceiving.

If you post on here that PERSON A did not say this or that, and I produce a video of that person saying it, then you lied to everyone in the forum. Of course, we find in today's age that those videos can and are manipulated and that is a caution. If you say something, and it is your opinion on something or somebody, in my world you should supply what generated your opinion. That is civil discourse, and disagreements are based on differing OPINIONS. There can be no civil discourse if based on lies.....flat out impossible

I would always avoid someone who lies, and that is always my premise. I have NEVER questioned an opinion based on truth, disagreed maybe, but never questioned or dismissed.

I may be misunderstanding you, and not sure why you, or anyone would be angry as you seem to be because someone asked you to back up comments.

I am not putting words in your mouth, but you seem to be giving carte blanc approval to misstate things, or lie to people simply because of some philosophical feeling about defining truth.

I can say, with almost 100% accuracy that a liar is a liar. Whether lying by omission or flat out telling things that are not true.

The discussion you are trying to begin is philosophical, and well beyond me. I am sorry for whatever sparked such anger, but I have found in my 80 years that lying is lying.....most know it, and you "appear" to be trying to legitimize someone lying to you.

If this is meant to be philosophical rather than simple human behavior, I apologize. I subscribe to the philosophy of KISS.....and still, perhaps naively that A lie is an assertion that is believed to be false, typically used with the purpose of deceiving someone.

:bigbow::bigbow::bigbow::popcorn:

[dewilson58]

I have no facts.




I have no opinions.




Where is my cheeseburger.

[fw102807]

Opinion: I love the color of the sky.
Fact: The sky is blue.

Opinion: This dress makes me look fat.
Fact: I am fat.

Opinion: green-eyed people are all lazy.
Fact: there is no biological difference in inherent motivational behavior between green-eyed people and people with any other color eyes.

Opinion: The guy who rammed his golf cart into the Walmart glass door should be in jail.
Fact: The guy who rammed his golf cart into the pickup truck had a defective gas pedal. He committed no crime but he will ultimately be held responsible for the cost to replace the door.

Opinion: I like bees.
Fact: Bees are insects.
Also fact: The person who likes bees in the opinion above is not allergic to bees.

Learn to distinguish between fact and opinion. One is not always necessary in conjunction with the other, but if one is opining about something that can be proven factually correct or incorrect, then one should make some minimal attempt to determine which is which, before expressing one's opinion.

The sky is not always blue, you do not need to stay fat, green eyed people can be lazy, etc. Facts can be based on things that are often fluid. Facts are not absolute truths. In some cases they are not true at all. I do not believe you can rigidly accept all facts as true just because you think the source is credible because that is then opinion. I am not against facts I am against those who belittle others for not believing THEIR facts.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

The sky is not always blue, you do not need to stay fat, green eyed people can be lazy, etc. Facts can be based on things that are often fluid. Facts are not absolute truths. In some cases they are not true at all. I do not believe you can rigidly accept all facts as true just because you think the source is credible because that is then opinion. I am not against facts I am against those who belittle others for not believing THEIR facts.

Learn words. I AM..is a very specific condition. It means "what is happening at this very moment, to me, exclusively." I am - my state of existence in the current moment - fat.

Now, if I said "I am always fat" you'd have a point. But I didn't say that. And so your point on that statement is moot, and actually proves the difference between fact and opinion, or fact and lie.

Five years from now, I will be able to look back on this moment and say, "On July 2, 2019 at 8:38 AM EST, I was fat." And that fact would still be factual, and absolute truth. Even if I lose 20 pounds between now and then, that fact is not changeable.

With my statement of "green eyed people are always lazy" - the operative word there is always. Green eyed people are not ALWAYS lazy. They are no more or less often lazy than blue-eyed people.

At the moment I was looking up at the sky, it was blue. At that moment, the existence of the blue sky was factual. In 20 years when meteorologists look back on that moment in that specific location on the planet, and check their records, they will be able to tell you, without any doubt or hesitation, that the sky was, in fact, blue at that moment in that location. It is a fact, it was a fact, it will be a fact, and that fact will never change EVEN IF TOMORROW THE SKY TURNS PURPLE.

Facts are facts. Everything else is opinion, rhetoric, deceit, lie, hyperbole, red herrings, straw men, illusion, misinformation, misunderstanding, ignorance, or fiction (choose any one, or any combination).

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Which ties into my earlier post where I said... "different people have taken pieces of this fact, to espouse a view that is an incorrect and skewed opinion...."

Had each man been allowed to touch the entire elephant (analogous to researching), their 'opinion' would then more closely align with the fact...that it is an elephant.

It's also a good example of why researching is so important, if someone is actually interested in getting to the truth/fact(s)...versus just going with some "gut-feeling."

Because no matter their opinion (which was based on their limited/incomplete knowledge), the fact that it was an elephant...doesn't change. :shrug:


The fact - is that it was an elephant. No matter what anyone said ABOUT the elephant - that one fact was unchangeable.

[fw102807]

Learn words. I AM..is a very specific condition. It means "what is happening at this very moment, to me, exclusively." I am - my state of existence in the current moment - fat.

Now, if I said "I am always fat" you'd have a point. But I didn't say that. And so your point on that statement is moot, and actually proves the difference between fact and opinion, or fact and lie.

Five years from now, I will be able to look back on this moment and say, "On July 2, 2019 at 8:38 AM EST, I was fat." And that fact would still be factual, and absolute truth. Even if I lose 20 pounds between now and then, that fact is not changeable.

With my statement of "green eyed people are always lazy" - the operative word there is always. Green eyed people are not ALWAYS lazy. They are no more or less often lazy than blue-eyed people.

At the moment I was looking up at the sky, it was blue. At that moment, the existence of the blue sky was factual. In 20 years when meteorologists look back on that moment in that specific location on the planet, and check their records, they will be able to tell you, without any doubt or hesitation, that the sky was, in fact, blue at that moment in that location. It is a fact, it was a fact, it will be a fact, and that fact will never change EVEN IF TOMORROW THE SKY TURNS PURPLE.

Facts are facts. Everything else is opinion, rhetoric, deceit, lie, hyperbole, red herrings, straw men, illusion, misinformation, misunderstanding, ignorance, or fiction (choose any one, or any combination).

The sky appears blue due to atmospheric conditions, I have no way of knowing whether you are fat or not or whether it was an elephant or not. As I said my objection is to the arrogant people who insist that what they believe to be true should be accepted by everyone.

[Taltarzac725]

How many bones are in an elephant? - Quora (https://www.quora.com/How-many-bones-are-in-an-elephant)

The number of bones in an elephant can vary according to the species and I would assume that some kind of mutation might cause smaller or larger number of bones.

So, even facts in science can vary like how many bones are in an animal.

Science usually sticks pretty much to facts and not opinions.

[Bucco]

The sky appears blue due to atmospheric conditions, I have no way of knowing whether you are fat or not or whether it was an elephant or not. As I said my objection is to the arrogant people who insist that what they believe to be true should be accepted by everyone.

This thread, to me anyway, is confusing.

Are we speaking of philosophical discussions of finding the "TRUTH" ?

Or, as this post seems to imply, someone stating that they are right and you are wrong ?

BIG difference. The first has not end to the discussion and my thoughts are not on shades of sky color, nor the number of bones in an elephant.

If your child came home and told you that his or hers GPA was 3.5 and you found that the FACT, which is the real GPA, was 2.3. Is that a lie...in what way can you twist a 2.3 into a 3.5 ? Which is true.

If facts are up to the eye of the beholder, then we are moving to total an complete chaos. An opinion, BASED ON FACTS, is a different story, but not the basic facts.

I am simply not sure if someone told you that their opinion is the truth or whether they insisted their facts were true, and supplied no credible evidence.

These are totally different scenarios.

If you were told that a neighbor said something bad about you, and somehow it was on a recording and played for you and was clearly your neighbors voice and your neighbor identified himself or herself, which is true.

To me, in the two examples I gave, there is no doubt of the FACT or TRUTH. Anything to the contrary is lying and twisting of the truth. Simple as that. Your child should be disciplined for LYING to you about his/her GPA.......Your neighbor should be chastised and confronted, etc on his or her libel.

Pretty simple......your opinion can differ on how or why, but the facts do not change.

NOT sure what the instance you keep referring to is, in context, but that is important, to me anyway. Other wise this is an exercise in circular reasoning, ie. a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.

[ColdNoMore]

This thread, to me anyway, is confusing.

Are we speaking of philosophical discussions of finding the "TRUTH" ?

Or, as this post seems to imply, someone stating that they are right and you are wrong ?

BIG difference. The first has not end to the discussion and my thoughts are not on shades of sky color, nor the number of bones in an elephant.

If your child came home and told you that his or hers GPA was 3.5 and you found that the FACT, which is the real GPA, was 2.3. Is that a lie...in what way can you twist a 2.3 into a 3.5 ? Which is true.

If facts are up to the eye of the beholder, then we are moving to total and complete chaos.

An opinion, BASED ON FACTS, is a different story, but not the basic facts.

I am simply not sure if someone told you that their opinion is the truth or whether they insisted their facts were true, and supplied no credible evidence.

These are totally different scenarios.

If you were told that a neighbor said something bad about you, and somehow it was on a recording and played for you and was clearly your neighbors voice and your neighbor identified himself or herself, which is true.

To me, in the two examples I gave, there is no doubt of the FACT or TRUTH. Anything to the contrary is lying and twisting of the truth. Simple as that. Your child should be disciplined for LYING to you about his/her GPA.......Your neighbor should be chastised and confronted, etc on his or her libel.

Pretty simple......your opinion can differ on how or why, but the facts do not change.

NOT sure what the instance you keep referring to is, in context, but that is important, to me anyway. Other wise this is an exercise in circular reasoning, ie. a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.

The underlined above...nails IT. :ohdear:

[jebartle]

The sky is not always blue, you do not need to stay fat, green eyed people can be lazy, etc. Facts can be based on things that are often fluid. Facts are not absolute truths. In some cases they are not true at all. I do not believe you can rigidly accept all facts as true just because you think the source is credible because that is then opinion. I am not against facts I am against those who belittle others for not believing THEIR facts.

FACTS are NOT fluid, opinions are!!

[fw102807]

It was once a widely accepted fact that the earth was flat until someone proved it wasn’t. I do not accept everything that is presented to me as fact without considering all other possibilities first and I put no faith in loud mouth know-it-all’s.

[Bucco]

FACTS are NOT fluid, opinions are!!

Yep, and I find it difficult to understand those who wish to complicate it. Discussing the shade of blue in the my, or the bones in an elephant just baffles me, and how it relates

I do not think the Op was referring to any philosophical discussion at all , and this hypothetical talk is not fair to her premise.

Her objection as stated is somebody said that their facts were correct, and hers were not.

That is a confusing scenario, because she has not shared what she means or a context.

There have been rumblings on here because of two things I recall....not sure if this relates, but...

1. Someone posts something as a fact, and another poster asks for some credible source for that fact

2. Some poster posts something and supplies the source to show where this information was sourced.

These two things, for reasons not apparent to me set people off on here.

In either of those cases, the poster is either trying to learn something that has been presented as fact.....or in the second providing that info.

I have to be wrong because all my background in education, business and government has been clear that both are required for any civil discourse.

[Bucco]

It was once a widely accepted fact that the earth was flat until someone proved it wasn’t. I do not accept everything that is presented to me as fact without considering all other possibilities first and I put no faith in loud mouth know-it-all’s.

We do agree on "I put no faith in loud mouth know-it-alls"

And we almost agree on not accepting that is presented as fact, but I just would add that some investigation is in order and I will find f I was lied to or do what you seem to obj to to.....ask for credible sources for what is presented. Should not say hat YOU object to, but what many object to.

[Velvet]

Probably not quite the thread the OP expected I can’t quite make out what the actual issue was. But I love the discourse as a result, the wisdom of the people who post here. Such a pleasure to “listen” to you.

[sajoe]

This is highly indicative of the problems we are facing. There is no such thing as "personal facts" there is only personal opinion. If you present facts in an untruthful way, or incomplete, that is a LIE.

[Bucco]

Probably not quite the thread the OP expected I can’t quite make out what the actual issue was. But I love the discourse as a result, the wisdom of the people who post here. Such a pleasure to “listen” to you.

I agree totally.

As one who has been openly criticized for supplying links to support my opinion and presentation of "facts", and made fun of for asking for such credible basis, I can say I offer no apology. To have civil discourse or learn from others, you must have that.

Seems to me it used to be the accepted practice on this forum until recently, and I have often...very often....echoed how much I learned from posting on this forum in the past and reading others.

Not so much any more as you can see.....some posters openly have disdain for facts.......and say so, which to me is incredible and screams justification for "shredding" what is true.

i believe in the real world, we always have known what is a fact and what is not...what is true and what is not.

Key is to accept it. Circular reasoning seems to abound.

[Moderator]

This has been an interesting philosophical discussion about Facts, truth, and opinions.

Please keep your posts and thoughts generic and don't let this stimulating discussion turn into personal conflicts.

Thanks for your cooperation.

Moderator

[ColdNoMore]

I agree totally.

As one who has been openly criticized for supplying links to support my opinion and presentation of "facts", and made fun of for asking for such credible basis, I can say I offer no apology.

To have civil discourse or learn from others, you must have that.

Seems to me it used to be the accepted practice on this forum until recently, and I have often...very often....echoed how much I learned from posting on this forum in the past and reading others.

Not so much any more as you can see.....some posters openly have disdain for facts.......and say so, which to me is incredible and screams justification for "shredding" what is true.

i believe in the real world, we always have known what is a fact and what is not...what is true and what is not.

Key is to accept it. Circular reasoning seems to abound.

Ditto. :thumbup:

[jebartle]

I started a similar post on "truth" that flirted with subjects not allowed but found it very enlightening by our smart posters!