You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

Understanding of fact and opinion

Syamsu May 21, 2020 at 23:00 10725 views 52 comments
What is a fact, and what is an opinion? (like an opinion that something is beautiful)

Generally everyone already knows intuitively what the meaning of fact and opinion is. In common discourse everyone can convey an accurate fact, and express an opinion that something is beautiful.

But if you learn these basic concepts of reasoning very precisely, then that will make you more efficient, and increase your power of intelligence a good deal.

Starting with the concept of fact.

Definition: A fact is obtained by evidence of a creation, forcing to produce a 1 to 1 corresponding model of it, in the mind.

Example: Say a crime has occurred, and the police question witnesses about the facts of what happened.

"he came at her with a knife", "he held the knife high"

Basically the police make a 1 to 1 corresponding picture of what occurred. And that's all facts are, just copying from nature, to a model of it in the mind. Copying to pictures, to words, to mathematics.

What to know about facts:

  • Facts apply to creations.
  • A creation originates by choice.
  • The substance of creations is called material. The material domain.
  • Facts are forced by evidence


Now on to the more difficult concept, the concept of opinion.

Definition: An opinion is formed by choice, and expresses what it is that makes a choice.

Why the concept of opinion is more difficult, is because the concept depends on "choice". And if you talk about choosing, then you get into the socalled "problem of free will".

This is where you need a precise definition of choosing.

Definition: To choose means, to make one of alternative futures the present. Or it can be defined as. making a possible future the present, or not the present.

The main thing to remember is that in choosing we are anticipating a future of possiblities.

Now back to explaining how an opinion is formed.

Example: To say "I find the painting beautiful".

  • The opinion is formed by spontaneous expression of emotion with free will, thus chosen.


  • In choosing other possiblities presented themselves, like saying the painting is "ugly", "gorgeous", "interesting". Any chosen opinion is equally logically valid.


  • A forced opinon, like to be forced to say the painting is beautiful, provides an invalid opinion.


As you can see, the logic of opinion establishes that there is a spiritual domain. The spiritual domain is defined as all what makes a choice.

Emotions, the soul, God, personality, the self, are all defined in terms of that they make choices, and are therefore spiritual. Therefore it is a matter of chosen opinion if they are real.

It is a matter of chosen opinion what emotions are in someone's heart. To say fear is in the heart, or hate, both opinions are equally logically valid.

Some opinions might be noted as weird, mean, or unfair. But weirdness, being mean, or being unfair, is not logically invalid.

To deny God exists, is sort of equivalent to denying a particular emotion like fear or love exists. It is logically valid, but it seems weird. But that it is weird, is just my opinion.

Take a close look at how to apply the concept of fact and opinion.

The brain is organized in terms of decisionmaking processes. Purely objectively the decisionmaking appears as randomness. Because any decision in the event can turn out one of several different ways.

In the event, some neuron in the brain may fire, or not fire.

Then with subjectivity we feel what the spirit is in which those decisions are made, and express a chosen opinion on what it is.

Then the decisions which objectively appear as randomness, become meaningful expressions of fear, love, courage, and whatnot.

Basically in the universe in general, it's the same deal as with the brain. But in the universe there isn't much organization apparent in the decisionmaking.

In the universe in general it's more a question of very many independent decisions, without an apparent organization to them. Like the atoms of a cloud of gas. The atoms go all over the place.

In any case, still the same logic of opinion applies to the decisions in the universe in general, as it also applies to the decisions in the brain.

One can choose an opinion in what spirit those decisions are made. Usually one would only just choose the opinion it is "spirit".

What to know about opinion:
  • Opinions are chosen.
  • Opinions express what it is that makes a choice.
  • The substance of what makes a choice is called "spiritual". The spiritual domain
  • The spirit creates the material, by choice, and chooses which way the material turns out.


Curiously, as opinions are chosen, it means opinions are also creations. Therefore opinions are material, and it is a fact what an opinion consists of. We can see, as fact, the word "beautiful".

The same goes for a fantasy figure like Spiderman. It is a creation, therefore material, therefore factual.

But if we consider what emotions Spiderman has, like saying "Spiderman is angry", then it seems to me the emotions would still be spiritual.

In conclusion, the basic logic of fact and opinion can be summed up with the following creationist conceptual scheme:

[b]1. Creator / chooses / spiritual / identity of which is a matter of chosen opinion
2. Creation / chosen / material / existence of which is a matter of fact forced by evidence[/b]

Comments (52)

A Seagull May 21, 2020 at 23:25 #414814
Reply to Syamsu
A fact is verifiable from the available data, an opinion is not.
Banno May 21, 2020 at 23:40 #414816
Quoting Syamsu
Definition: A fact is obtained by evidence of a creation, forcing to produce a 1 to 1 corresponding model of it, in the mind.


That's wrong, for starters.

A fact is a true statement.

What's all that stuff about creation doing there?

Philosophy isn't just stuff you make up.
Syamsu May 22, 2020 at 02:21 #414848
Reply to Banno Got any facts which are not about creations?
Syamsu May 22, 2020 at 02:22 #414851
Reply to A Seagull To verify a fact, means to verify that the fact corresponds 1 to 1 with what the fact is about.
Pfhorrest May 22, 2020 at 02:24 #414852
I feel like I should have warn you guys about this guy, who has been going on about creationism and free will and the relationship of them to “facts” vs “opinions” for over a decade now, but whatever you’ll all see for yourselves soon enough.
Sir2u May 22, 2020 at 02:27 #414853
Quoting Syamsu
To verify a fact, means to verify that the fact corresponds 1 to 1 with what the fact is about.


If this is a fact, please verify using your own method.
Syamsu May 22, 2020 at 02:29 #414854
Reply to Pfhorrest Warn as in, you cannot just bluster your way through, with someone who has thoroughly studied an issue for a long time.
Syamsu May 22, 2020 at 02:33 #414856
Reply to Sir2u Picture factcheckers comparing facts with what the fact is about.
Sir2u May 22, 2020 at 02:40 #414859
Quoting Syamsu
Picture factcheckers comparing facts, and what the fact is about.


I did not ask you to tell me to use my imagination, I asked you to prove that what you said was true. On a one to one fact to what the fact is about sort of thing or whatever it was you said.

Picturing thing does not make them facts.
Syamsu May 22, 2020 at 02:48 #414860
Reply to Sir2u A fact is a model. The fact of people verifying facts, is a model of people verifying facts. So a picture.
Sir2u May 22, 2020 at 03:06 #414864
Quoting Syamsu
A fact is a model. The fact of people verifying facts, is a model of people verifying facts. So a picture.


You stated this as a fact and I asked you to verify it.

Quoting Syamsu
To verify a fact, means to verify that the fact corresponds 1 to 1 with what the fact is about.


I think that my cats have a better chance of catching their tales than you do of verifying that anything you have said can be verified by anything that you have said.
Syamsu May 22, 2020 at 03:12 #414865
Reply to Sir2u Either you are asking a nonsense question of verifying verification, or you just want a fact of how facts are verified. And I gave you the fact of how facts are verified.

Probably you were asking a nonsense question, and you want fact to mean, to feel certain. Seeing as that you are emoting.
Sir2u May 22, 2020 at 03:22 #414867
So you cannot prove that your other "fact" was a fact.

Quoting Syamsu
Got any facts which are not about creations?


Here you seem to be stating that all facts are about creations, could you please verify that this is so.

Creation would mean that things are made by someone/thing, what [s]proof[/s] verifiable facts do you have that any facts were created by anything/one?
Syamsu May 22, 2020 at 03:32 #414868
Reply to Sir2u Well, you cannot make a 1 to 1 corresponding model of for instance "fear". Which is in category 1, the creator category. You can make a painting to express what fear is, but it's not a model. And as there doesn't seem to be any other categories besides creator and creation, it is proven that facts are only about creations. But why don't you present a fact which is not about a creation.
Banno May 22, 2020 at 03:51 #414870
A Seagull May 22, 2020 at 03:53 #414872
Quoting Syamsu
?A Seagull To verify a fact, means to verify that the fact corresponds 1 to 1 with what the fact is about.

What is the difference between a 'fact' and 'what a fact is about'? And how can the two be compared?
Syamsu May 22, 2020 at 03:57 #414876
Reply to A Seagull Uh, you know the distinction between a model of something, and what it is a model of.
Banno May 22, 2020 at 04:03 #414884
Reply to Syamsu OK, so go back to my question... What's all that stuff about creation doing there?
Syamsu May 22, 2020 at 04:04 #414885
Reply to Banno Facts are by definition about creations.
Banno May 22, 2020 at 04:08 #414886
Reply to Syamsu Well, you will be aware that what you espouse is not a widely held view.

Can you offer anything that might lead us to think that facts - true statements - are about creations?

And how will you get around god? Presuming that he is the creator, and hence not created, there can be no facts about him.

Which crack in your pot gets around that?
Banno May 22, 2020 at 04:09 #414887
...and @Sir2u's point remains undressed.
Syamsu May 22, 2020 at 04:14 #414888
Reply to Banno My view explains the logic used in common discourse. Also generally every academic discipline was founded by a creationist.

All in the universe appears contingent, it can be, or not be. All appears to be preceded by the possibility of it, and then the possibility is made the present, meaning it is chosen.

That is why the existence of God is almost universally acknowledged as a matter of faith, which faith is a form of opinion. It is not considered a matter of fact.
Banno May 22, 2020 at 04:32 #414892
Quoting Syamsu
My view explains the logic used in common discourse. Also generally every academic discipline was founded by a creationist.

All in the universe appears contingent, it can be, or not be. All appears to be preceded by the possibility of it, and then the possibility is made the present, meaning it is chosen.

That is why the existence of God is almost universally acknowledged as a matter of faith, which faith is a form of opinion. It is not considered a matter of fact.


There are so many errors here, from the nature of logic through to the contingency of choice, that, well, one is left without reply.

But a good rule of thumb is that when someone explains everything in such an idiosyncratic and obtuse fashion, they have of course found the truth for which mankind has searched since our creation.

So thank you for sharing. Doubtless all will now see the way, and you can take your place as the greatest amongst us.

We will erect vast monuments to you in the form of fractured terracotta.





Syamsu May 22, 2020 at 04:41 #414893
Reply to Banno Thanks. I was helped by that generally everyone already uses the correct logic of fact and opinion in common discourse. Also this was already made plain by the emphasis on faith in religion generally, that there is a distinction between matters of opinion and matters of fact.

But we can erect monuments to commemorate the stupidity of modern people to not know what free will, choosing, fact, opinion, emotions, subjectivity is.
Banno May 22, 2020 at 04:48 #414894
Quoting Syamsu
But we can erect monuments to memorialize the stupidity of modern people to not know what free will, choosing, fact, opinion, emotions, subjectivity is.


It must be difficult, to see the world change around you, undermining the doctrine on which you depended. I can understand why you might wish to glue the broken pot back together. But it's beyond repair, I'm afraid.
Syamsu May 22, 2020 at 04:56 #414896
Reply to Banno Indeed, society goes to shit. And religion as well.
A Seagull May 22, 2020 at 04:58 #414897
Quoting Syamsu
?A Seagull Uh, you know the distinction between a model of something, and what it is a model of.


oh I see. But then you have no means of comparing your 'facts' with 'what the facts are about'
. For all you have is the model.
Syamsu May 22, 2020 at 04:59 #414898
Reply to A Seagull Why would that be? You have a model of the moon, and then there is the actual moon itself.
Banno May 22, 2020 at 05:00 #414899
Reply to Syamsu What we need is more guns.
Syamsu May 22, 2020 at 05:04 #414900
Reply to Banno True. Everyone will want to start their own country, with themselves as souvereign, with a gun to enforce their laws. That is what you get when emotion is discarded. Then it all just disintegrates.
Pfhorrest May 22, 2020 at 07:07 #414915
@Syamsu Can you share with us that thing you have with the two columns, and on one side is things like "subjective", "choice", "opinion", "creator", etc, and the other side has things like "objective", "no choice", "fact", "creation", etc? I think that would really clear things up for everyone.
Outlander May 22, 2020 at 08:04 #414920
Reply to Sir2u

Perhaps by a 1 to 1 basis in the mind meaning said proposed fact ie. 'the water is hot' corresponds to one or more things that can be proven. The water is 150 degrees farenheit. Steam is beginning to rise from the water. I stick my hand in it for more than a few seconds it will be very uncomfortable. Etc? The statement 'the water is hot' is therefore a fact not an opinion. Whereas 'the water is too hot' or 'not hot enough' may be the opposite.

Hm?
Outlander May 22, 2020 at 10:22 #414942
Reply to Syamsu

They're gonna want a bit more than that, friend. I know I did.

Pragmatically speaking I've chosen to, for sake of debate including all, assign the 'Creator' to be one of the following possibilities, meaning there is no other possibility than the following two. Either as an entity, as we believe. Or as the process of millions of years of random, meaningless evolution. It has to be one of these and so use of the word 'Creator' can now be used in any argument regardless of the views of its audience.
Syamsu May 22, 2020 at 10:42 #414945
Reply to Outlander No, creator is here defined, as what did the job of making the choice turn out A instead of B. Emotions are in this category of the creator. Emotions are more commonly referred to than God is.

Also, this conceptual scheme states specifically that any question about the identity of a creator must be answered with a chosen opinion. So choosing the opinion God did not create the universe, is perfectly valid, according to this conceptual scheme. It is totally wrong interpretation that this scheme requires belief in God.
Outlander May 22, 2020 at 10:53 #414946
Reply to Syamsu

Ah, so cause and effect? The creator of an effect is the cause and its effect is the creation. Sounds about right.
Syamsu May 22, 2020 at 11:14 #414949
Reply to Outlander Except that cause and effect is the logic of being forced, while a creator chooses in freedom.
Outlander May 22, 2020 at 11:37 #414954
Reply to Syamsu

So to create or not to create? If this creator does create is it not its effect? If it doesnt create isn't this an effect (or lack of, yet still able to be referenced say if an architect does not create a dam he was supposed to and a low lying town becomes flooded) this effect or creation as well?
Syamsu May 22, 2020 at 11:48 #414958
Reply to Outlander It seems sensible for the sake of clarity to reserve cause and effect, for things being forced.
Outlander May 22, 2020 at 12:06 #414962
Reply to Syamsu

If a cause is forced is it not merely an effect of a greater cause? Perhaps that's your point.

What, in a sentence or two (or more, this is complex or at least unclear to me- not including examples), is a (or the) creator? What is the creation?
Syamsu May 22, 2020 at 12:46 #414966
Reply to Outlander Generally for people creating, only the agency of people's choices, their emotions, would be the creator, and the result of the choices would be the creation.
Outlander May 22, 2020 at 16:21 #415011
Reply to Syamsu

Name a general situation where a person hasn't been drastically influenced by their environment ie. other people. So who could say who's creation it really belongs to?
Syamsu May 22, 2020 at 18:26 #415042
Reply to Outlander Not really the point here. The point is that all opinions are in reference to the agency of a choice. Personal opinion is an inherently creationist concept.
Pfhorrest May 22, 2020 at 19:02 #415049
If it helps clear things up, I’m pretty sure Syamsu means more or less “preference” when he says “opinion”. This “fact-opinion” divide is thus basically the fact-value divide.
A Seagull May 22, 2020 at 19:08 #415051
Quoting Syamsu
?A Seagull Why would that be? You have a model of the moon, and then there is the actual moon itself.


The 'actual moon itself' only exists as part of the model.
Syamsu May 22, 2020 at 20:12 #415056
Reply to A Seagull The better way is to first comprehend common discourse. It contains what you say is true in daily life. Then from that position, you can bargain towards a new position. Because what you are saying seems to be unrelated to common discourse, contrived from nothing.
Syamsu May 22, 2020 at 20:24 #415059
Reply to Pfhorrest Opinion is the proper straightforward word.

And it's not some kind of innocent accident that people are clueless about emotions, choosing. Choosing you say, your honor? I made choices? I don't know what it means judge. People have emotions? Yes, another supercomplicated issue that I don't understand the basics about. My opinions you say, on what is good and loving. That word does not sound quite right to me, "opinion". Preference maybe, or maybe something else. It's all so complicated.
Sir2u May 23, 2020 at 02:43 #415108
Quoting Syamsu
Well, you cannot make a 1 to 1 corresponding model of for instance "fear". Which is in category 1, the creator category.


So fear is a fact or not? I know for a fact that I have been in fear of many things in my life(scared shitless sometimes), would that serve as a model? Where can I download a copy of the table containing the categories you are talking about?

Quoting Syamsu
You can make a painting to express what fear is, but it's not a model.


So what exactly would serve as a model for a fact?

Quoting Syamsu
And as there doesn't seem to be any other categories besides creator and creation, it is proven that facts are only about creations.


Please gives us a link to this proof. They have to be somewhere right?



Quoting Syamsu
But why don't you present a fact which is not about a creation.


I don't want to interfere with the presentation of your hypothesis, theory, conjecture or whatever you want to call it. It would just muddy the waters.

And I have not made any bloody stupid comments that need to be defended, yet.
Sir2u May 23, 2020 at 02:45 #415109
Quoting Outlander
Perhaps by a 1 to 1 basis in the mind meaning said proposed fact ie. 'the water is hot' corresponds to one or more things that can be proven. The water is 150 degrees farenheit. Steam is beginning to rise from the water. I stick my hand in it for more than a few seconds it will be very uncomfortable. Etc? The statement 'the water is hot' is therefore a fact not an opinion. Whereas 'the water is too hot' or 'not hot enough' may be the opposite.


So why the hell does he not just say that instead of blathering on about creation and creators?
Syamsu May 23, 2020 at 03:36 #415111
Reply to Sir2u
Fear is not a fact, it is your opinion that you were frightened. A good clue as to that it is an opinion, is all the variety in expression of fear. Screaming, cowering, and so on. Wide variety. There is no monotone factual statement of fear existing in the brain. The variety shows that it operates with free will. Because with choosing, you have alternative futures available, and you choose one, choose another, and you get variety.

The categories are at the bottom of the original post. All your questions are already answered in the original post.
Syamsu May 23, 2020 at 03:41 #415112
Reply to Sir2u It is simply the truth of how it works, that opinions are in reference to a creator, and facts are in reference to a creation.
Sir2u May 24, 2020 at 03:11 #415346
Quoting Syamsu
Fear is not a fact, it is your opinion that you were frightened.


Picture if you will this guy, 2 meters tall, 170 kilos, arm spread of almost 2 meters, each arm of which is thicker than most people's leg. He has long shitty looking hair and beard and a big scar running from his waist up to his cheek. He is running straight at you with a bloody big machete screaming " you're gonna die mother fucker".

Quoting Syamsu
The substance of what makes a choice is called "spiritual".


And fear is then just your spiritual choice and you can change it if you want. Yeah, OK.


Quoting Syamsu
It is simply the truth of how it works, that opinions are in reference to a creator


An opinion might be, in the sense that someone created it by putting certain groups of facts together and creating an opinion. But, by adding the facts they either come out as an opinion or a fact. That might be blamed on illogical thinking or ignorance, not necessarily on truth value.

But does not one who creates make the creation, is that not what creators are for.
So according to your reasoning there is little difference between the two,

Quoting Syamsu
Creation / chosen / material / existence of which is a matter of fact forced by evidence


Creation - implies a creator, which you say is the maker of opinions

chosen - implies subjectivity, definitely not effective as fact proving

material - implies that facts can only be "material things" or about them maybe, where as most if not all facts are inmaterial because facts are language.

Existence of which is a matter of fact forced by evidence - is maybe circular reasoning or redundant or ad infinitum because you are saying that it is a fact because other facts make it so and they are facts because other facts make them so and so on into infinity.

But apart from all of this, you still have not addressed the earlier post I made properly.

Quoting Sir2u
Here you seem to be stating that all facts are about creations, could you please verify that this is so.

Creation would mean that things are made by someone/thing, what [s]proof[/s] verifiable facts do you have that any facts were created by anything/one?

Syamsu May 24, 2020 at 11:05 #415443
Reply to Sir2u All your questions are answered in the original post, which you still have not read.

When you were frightened, you might have yelled, "AAAAAAAH". To yell aaaaah, basically is the same as saying I am afraid. Do you insist aaaaaaah is fact, as you insist fear is fact?

Consider the basic logic.
There are alternative futures A and B available, A is made the present, meaning A is chosen.

Then there is the question "what was it that made the choice turn out A instead of B?

Now you are basically saying that this question must be answered by gathering evidence in order to establish a fact of what it was, while I am saying the question must be answered by spontaneous expression of emotion with free will, choosing an opinion on what it was.

Say it was in fact X which made the choice turn out A. Then X being a definite factual thing, X forced A, and the choice could not have turned out B. So you get a logic error of contradiction between B being possihle and impossible.

But if you just express a personal opinion fear made the decision turn out A. Then fear being a subjective thing, then you have posited no definite factual thing forcing the result A. No logic error, it works.

Also, you simply provide no room for subjectivity at all. You make everything including beauty, factual.

Also, it is a bit odd to say language is material, as I do say, but actually for newspaper writers, they do refer to articles they write as material. Have you got any material on this person, as meanng have you got any written articles about this person.