quote:
Originally posted by jackgephart
End of conversation.
You keep saying that. You are welcome to withdraw from this conversation, but you do not rule it. The rest of us may want to continue it. It is not, at this point either personal or abusive.
Back to the subject...
There is a difference between expressing an opinion (as you may have noticed, I carefully lable my opinions as such, and often add additional disclaimers) and stating something as if it were fact.
For instance, the above was a statement of fact. I assert there is a difference, and you are encouraged to dispute that statement if you can, by presenting documentation, logic or personal experience etc. Below, I will express my
opinion about why that distinction is important, and while you are welcome to express a different opinion, there is no sense in attempting to dispute my opinion. If I am sane, I will change my opinion when you successfully dispute my statement of fact.
In my opinion, many people seem to present their opinion as if it were fact, and conversely claim that any statement of "fact' cannot be challenged on the basis of it being their opinion. Whether this is because of carelessness, ignorance or fear - the result is a blurring of opinion and fact. It's gotten to the point where some people will tell you there
are no facts, just opinions.
For instance, recently someone told me that "Global Warming is causing a decline Vermont's Maple Syrup harvest". That's a statement of fact, whether right or wrong. It contains information which can be verified or disputed.
Turns out that while there is a decline in the Maple Syrup crop, most of it is caused by aging trees, and the rest is caused by aging harvesters and unpaid taxes. Further, while the 0.6ºf rise in global temperature is measurable (but still inside the margin of error), there has been no measurable change in our local weather that can be tied to the size of crops. Short of this year's spring crop (A short spring following a hard, cold late-winter, not warming) there has been no significant weather related decline in harvests.
There's more, but the point is that when I demonstrated these facts, he replied, "I have a right to my opinion", which is true, but does not apply to statements of fact. But he claimed that the phrase was an "opinion" and was therefore unassailable by logic, new information or personal experience. Am I the only one who finds this disturbing? Who cares about the durn trees when Global Sanity is at risk?
If he had said, "I believe that Global Warming is damaging the Maple Syrup industry" I would have had to agree that he did seem to believe that. I cannot and would not dispute his beliefs or opinion.
If he were sane, correcting his facts
might change his opinion.
Now you know, in part, why I feel the distinction between expressions of opinion and statements of fact is important. While you might be able to dispute some of the statements of fact (for instance, you may have been present for the conversation and might correct me on the dialog or you might look up the temperatures in Vermont and the Syrup crops sizes), you cannot dispute my opinion that I find debates such as this seem less productive and more argumentative because of the smearing of the line between Fact and Opinion.
That last paragraph was largely a statement of fact, not opinion, and you are therefore welcome to dispute it if you can.
