Facts vs. Opinions

[iacas]

Originally Posted by k-troop

2. Opinions can be right or wrong. However, opinions can be supported by a sufficient weight of evidence, and couched in a certain way, so as to be virtually unassailable.  For example, a biologist's analysis of a DNA profile, properly conducted, can be stated as an opinion with 99.999999999999% accuracy.

No, they can't.

Facts (statements about them, whatever) can be "right" or "wrong." Opinions can't be either of those things. They can be "well supported" or "reasonable" or "stupid" or "baseless" or "agreeable" but they can't be right or wrong.

I think maybe you meant to say "can't" but typed "can," because it's an odd thing to say "however" and then say what you said.

[k-troop]

Originally Posted by iacas

No, they can't.

Facts (statements about them, whatever) can be "right" or "wrong." Opinions can't be either of those things. They can be "well supported" or "reasonable" or "stupid" or "baseless" or "agreeable" but they can't be right or wrong.

I think maybe you meant to say "can't" but typed "can," because it's an odd thing to say "however" and then say what you said.

Yeah, you're right.  Or wrong.  (Is this an opinion?)

I was meaning to say that they can't be categorically "right" or "wrong" the way a statement of fact can.  But they can be really, really close to being "right" or "wrong", depending on the nature of the opinion.  So close, in fact, as to obliterate the distinction.

[zeg]

Originally Posted by k-troop

I was meaning to say that they can't be categorically "right" or "wrong" the way a statement of fact can.  But they can be really, really close to being "right" or "wrong", depending on the nature of the opinion.  So close, in fact, as to obliterate the distinction.

I think this is abuse of the words "right" and "wrong" if that's what you're saying.

In order to make an opinion right or wrong, you have to perform some logical gymnastics. For example, when you claim that, "Gandhi was better than Hitler," is an example of a "right" opinion, you're not really talking about the opinion itself. The complete logical statement that you're arguing as "right" is more like, "Given the prevailing modern moral values, Gandhi was better than Hitler." This is a logical statement, and can amount to a factual statement.

The reason that opinion seems factual is simply that the values are so widely shared that we'd consider anyone who disagreed with that opinion to be a nutjob. However, as Erik pointed out, there are people who believe Hitler had the right idea, and there certainly have been entire societies that placed radically different value on human lives.

An opinion is simply logically incomplete. It isn't true or false. It depends on unstated (and perhaps unstateable) elements. Two people can agree on every fact and every rule of logic and yet hold differing opinions because they possess different values. If you want to make an opinion "absolute," you have to include the viewpoint itself in the statement to escape this.

[k-troop]

Originally Posted by zeg

I think this is abuse of the words "right" and "wrong" if that's what you're saying.

In order to make an opinion right or wrong, you have to perform some logical gymnastics. For example, when you claim that, "Gandhi was better than Hitler," is an example of a "right" opinion, you're not really talking about the opinion itself. The complete logical statement that you're arguing as "right" is more like, "Given the prevailing modern moral values, Gandhi was better than Hitler." This is a logical statement, and can amount to a factual statement.

The reason that opinion seems factual is simply that the values are so widely shared that we'd consider anyone who disagreed with that opinion to be a nutjob. However, as Erik pointed out, there are people who believe Hitler had the right idea, and there certainly have been entire societies that placed radically different value on human lives.

An opinion is simply logically incomplete. It isn't true or false. It depends on unstated (and perhaps unstateable) elements. Two people can agree on every fact and every rule of logic and yet hold differing opinions because they possess different values. If you want to make an opinion "absolute," you have to include the viewpoint itself in the statement to escape this.

What you wrote is 100% consistent with what I wrote.  But, you may be misunderstanding what I wrote.

We're not performing logic puzzles here on the forum--we're discussing golf.  And injecting an argument about the difference between a fact or an opinion, when the opinion is so widely shared that no reasonable person would disagree with it, serves no useful purpose to the discussion.  It's a sidebar argument which, even if you technically right in applying the rules of logical reasoning, doesn't change the outcome of the discussion.

(For clarification, I'm in scenario #2 or #3 from my prior post.)

For example, I can say "Tiger Woods was the best golfer in the world from 1998-2009, and that is a fact!"  You could respond with "Well, that's an opinion:  under my definition of 'best', you have to be a good role model and good family man."  Then we could have a long discussion about logic, facts, and fallacies, but it wouldn't change anything:  any reasonable person is still going to agree that Tiger Woods was the "best" golfer in the world during that period, because he won 14 majors, 71 tournaments, and held the #1 ranking for all but 30 weeks (or something).  Your quibble over the definition of a "fact" or the word "best" is a red-herring that distracts from the main point of the discussion on a golf forum.

[zeg]

Quote:

Originally Posted by k-troop

What you wrote is 100% consistent with what I wrote.  But, you may be misunderstanding what I wrote.

I think I understood what you wrote, but maybe not what you meant. From your earlier message, with emphasis added:

Quote:

2. Opinions can be right or wrong. However, opinions can be supported by a sufficient weight of evidence, and couched in a certain way, so as to be virtually unassailable.  For example, a biologist's analysis of a DNA profile, properly conducted, can be stated as an opinion with 99.999999999999% accuracy.

Did you mean to say "Opinion's can't be right or wrong" where I've bolded? Reading it again, as well as your reply to Erik, that would make more sense. In that case, yes, I'd say we agree, at least for the most part.

Quote:

For example, I can say "Tiger Woods was the best golfer in the world from 1998-2009, and that is a fact!"  You could respond with "Well, that's an opinion:  under my definition of 'best', you have to be a good role model and good family man."  Then we could have a long discussion about logic, facts, and fallacies, but it wouldn't change anything:  any reasonable person is still going to agree that Tiger Woods was the "best" golfer in the world during that period, because he won 14 majors, 71 tournaments, and held the #1 ranking for all but 30 weeks (or something).  Your quibble over the definition of a "fact" or the word "best" is a red-herring that distracts from the main point of the discussion on a golf forum.

Yes, if you have a situation where "best" is very well defined, or where essentially all the ways you might measure it point to the same result, then the line between opinion and fact gets very blurry. However, even in an example like this, it's not an enitrely academic argument. For example, for the sake of argument, I will only agree that TW was the best from 1998-2008. There is still some room in the example for differences of opinion.

[iacas]

Now's a good time to bump this thread (in my opinion… :D).

I just wanted to add that, while I'm occasionally accused of writing, or acting, as if my opinions are "right" or "wrong" I have no such belief myself. I may be confident, or feel it's "best" to do a certain thing with your wrists at this particular point in the golf swing (or whatever), but in no way do I think it's "right" or "wrong" because it is not a fact (or a statement of fact) - it is just an opinion. It's an opinion I think is usually well supported by some facts and a whole lot of other stuff (experience, preferences, the personality of the golfer, his history, etc.), but at the end of the day it's just an opinion, and nobody knows it better than I do.

---

If I could change one thing about how people interact online, or read things online, it might very well be this whole idea of "right/wrong" and "fact/opinion." Right and wrong feel so personal, and (made up stat:) 99% of the negative feelings online stem from people taking disagreement (with their opinion) personally because they feel they're being told "they're wrong."

Facts (or statements of fact) can be right or wrong. Opinions are not. They may be supported, nearly universally agreeable, etc. but they can't be "right" or "wrong" because someone, somewhere, is free to take a different opinion on the same thing. And we, as humans, are free to weigh and ultimately accept or disregard (or something in between) the different opinion.

---

Very little of what I say day to day, here or in real life, is a fact. Reciting facts does not lead to a discussion. Imagine a thread titled "1+3=4." Man, that would win Kickstarter every month and twice in January, right?! No. :-P

And very little of what everyone else says here is fact, too. So take it easy: nobody can ever really say you're wrong unless you're discussing facts: Tiger Woods is a lousy golfer is an opinion. Tiger Woods is ranked outside the top ten in the world is a fact. One can be agreeable or disagreeable, the other can be right or wrong.

That could be seen as a long way of saying this: stop taking things personally. It's just someone else's opinion, and it's just golf (or in the OT areas of the site, it's just politics, or just sports, or just cigars, or whatever).

[Gator Hazard]

That could be seen as a long way of saying this: stop taking things personally. It's just someone else's opinion, and it's just golf (or in the OT areas of the site, it's just politics, or just sports, or just cigars, or whatever).

We have a cigars thread?  Didn't even know.  Have to check it out.