Thread: The Distinction Between Truth and Opinion

It is my understanding that opinion differs from fact in that opinion cannot be true orfalse. The notion that 5 * 6 = 32 is not an opinion, it is a fact, albeit false. I agree that opinions published are fair game for publication of differing opinions, but no opinion can be untrue. That designation is reserved for statements of fact.

Originally posted by O-Nieronaut
but no opinion can be untrue. That designation is reserved for statements of fact.

Any statement or assertion can be rated in regards to how well it corresponds to reality. Indeed, it is your funny little argument in the justification of False Opinions, considering every Opinion, whether true or false, of equal weight; it is just such like arguments that give us the Problem we have today -- where people suppose that everything said is somehow equalily valid.

The Moon is made of sand and stone.

The Moon is made of Green Cheese.

Both may equally be opinions, but it is pure silliness to suppose that they each are equally true; and it is a Culture of Lies that can create funny little Arguments to insist that they could both possibly be of equal strenghth simply by virtue of being Opinion.

I'm sure in the Far East, where Education advances forward everyday, that there are no silly fools writing in anywhere supposing that all Opinions are Equally True. I'm certain that only in the Decadent West is the Moon considered to be half made out of Green Cheese only because some idiot thinks so.

Truth is truth, and it will always be that way. Truth about anything in the universe is not refined into an opinion, yet all absolute truth is perceived to one's mind as relative, and both types of realizations are necessary to recognize truth from lies. Truth is basically what never changes.

Opinion only or usually refers to a personal preferences, a liking, a beliefs where the line is not drawn to say what is in one's best interests. Unfortunately, it's often abused to extreme extents of selfishness as long as it has convincing justifications...but then again, that's only done by clever reasoning.

You cannot have an opinion about something objective like The Moon is Made of Cheese (unless you choose to ignore objective proof and continue to believe your fantasy). Yet until scientific proofs are published and understood, opinions will be one's only resort to compensate for lack of total knowledge. I guess that means somehow, all opinions can be dissected (in some way I would have no idea of) and categorized into objective and predictable truths....*after all, humans have patterns of behaviour under certain circumstances* Yet even then, so called scientific proofs are theories and hypothesis that a collective group of intellectuals agree on for the rest of the world and are best "accepted truths."

Oh, but masturbation can only feel good for so long... but I sure will take that ice cream. But I definately don't do both at the same time.

I think you can be very judgemental at times, Leo Volont. That's an opinion as far as I know, but, is it true or false? Should we see how closely it corresponds with reality? Who's to say if it corresponds or not with reality? Wouldn't that be an opinion as well?

If I say that the moon is made of cheese, that is in no way an opinion, it would just be an expression of my lack of knowledge. However, if I say that Leo Volont is judgemental, now that's an opinion, because it has nothing to do with lack of knowledge, it's just the way I perceive it.

Opinions should always be expressed, becuz it depends on the rest of us if they're weightless or not, as long as they are in fact opinions and not just pure ignorance.

Wow Leo, that was a very interesting essay, nice an thought provoking. It is true that some opinions are wrong, such as your example of the moon from a post above, however, it is impossible to know the truth about some things, such as life after death. Things in the Bible are opinions, things in the Quran are opinions, me saying that a mouse called Dave made the universe is just as valid as what some guy called John wrote thousands of yeas ago. People have debatd on thise things for centuries and the only truth is, no one knows.

Originally posted by AirRick101
Truth is truth, and it will always be that way. Truth about anything in the universe is not refined into an opinion, yet all absolute truth is perceived to one's mind as relative, and both types of realizations are necessary to recognize truth from lies. Truth is basically what never changes.

Opinion only or usually refers to a personal preferences, a liking, a beliefs where the line is not drawn to say what is in one's best interests. Unfortunately, it's often abused to extreme extents of selfishness as long as it has convincing justifications...but then again, that's only done by clever reasoning.

You cannot have an opinion about something objective like The Moon is Made of Cheese (unless you choose to ignore objective proof and continue to believe your fantasy). Yet until scientific proofs are published and understood, opinions will be one's only resort to compensate for lack of total knowledge. I guess that means somehow, all opinions can be dissected (in some way I would have no idea of) and categorized into objective and predictable truths....*after all, humans have patterns of behaviour under certain circumstances* Yet even then, so called scientific proofs are theories and hypothesis that a collective group of intellectuals agree on for the rest of the world and are best \"accepted truths.\"

Oh, but masturbation can only feel good for so long... but I sure will take that ice cream. But I definately don't do both at the same time.

Okay, that sort of refined our terminologies. Then, using your frames of reference, my problem becomes that people are dispensing entirely with the Notions of Truth, or even with Facts, and they are acting upon a new cultural de facto premise that everything is Opinion... the correlary to this new revolution in Thought being that everybody is entitled to their Opinion. Truth has been replaced by Opinion. And like our School Teachers and those who object to my quibbling over Reality, they really don't care whether anything corresponds to Existence or not... to them all Opinion is equally Valid and there is nothing higher than Opinion.

I suppose their most significant motivation is that they find it unpleasant to ever have to argue. They suppose the World would be a nicer place if EVERYBODY COULD BE EQUALLY RIGHT. Not being intellectuals, or touched by intellectual concerns, they've never learned to appreciate the beauty or power of Truth. To them it seems more important that everybody be right.

Originally posted by Kaimelar
I think you can be very judgemental at times, Leo Volont. That's an opinion as far as I know, but, is it true or false? Should we see how closely it corresponds with reality? Who's to say if it corresponds or not with reality? Wouldn't that be an opinion as well?

If I say that the moon is made of cheese, that is in no way an opinion, it would just be an expression of my lack of knowledge. However, if I say that Leo Volont is judgemental, now that's an opinion, because it has nothing to do with lack of knowledge, it's just the way I perceive it.

Opinions should always be expressed, becuz it depends on the rest of us if they're weightless or not, as long as they are in fact opinions and not just pure ignorance.

Well, this would be all well and good if I were arguing about wishing washing opinions that could hardly matter, such as whether Leo Volont is judgmental or not. But my problem is with people who come up against hard facts and logical arguments with opinions based on nothing more than aesthetic feelings, and suppose that should come out even -- SINCE EVERYONE IS ENTITLED TO THEIR OPINION.

I think Kaimelar helped clarify the muddy waters of my argument by distinguishing between the characteristics of Truth and Opinion. It seems that our New Culture of Nuevo Intellectuals would have it that we recognize no hard facts, no absolute truths, but that we equalize everything in some vast nebulous field of Opinion where everybody is allowed to be as right as everybody else. Its an Intellectual Ethic designed for Women's Tea Parties where the only priority is that everybody remain pleasant and speak with perpetual smiles on their face. Truth is something people argue about, and so it is now forbidden... too troublesome to have at any polite social gathering. Truth has become the most recent casualty to creeping Political Correctness.

Besides, Leo Volont being judgmental is a fact.

Originally posted by Alex D
Wow Leo, that was a very interesting essay, nice an thought provoking. It is true that some opinions are wrong, such as your example of the moon from a post above, however, it is impossible to know the truth about some things, such as life after death. Things in the Bible are opinions, things in the Quran are opinions, me saying that a mouse called Dave made the universe is just as valid as what some guy called John wrote thousands of yeas ago. People have debatd on thise things for centuries and the only truth is, no one knows.

Life after death. Why should it be so difficult to know the truth about that. The Vatican has warehouses full of complete libraries which document, using evidence to a legal standard, the existence of Saints who have survived their physical Deaths and continue to act in intercession and have been known to appear in Apparition after their deaths.

What do we need for us to know besides empirical evidence, of which we have more than plenty. Yes, I know, the Enlightened Atheists of Science insist upon a level of quantification that if applied to all other facet of Human Knowledge would leave us with virtually nothing remaining.

One needs to remember that in the West there was a Great War against Catholicism and that Catholicism lost. The Forces of Atheism won. The Saints and the Supernatural, the underlying strengths of what had been a Religious Civilization, were all tossed out. It became popular to recite the formula that we cannot know about Supernatural Things. But those Wars are over. Are we still afraid of being brought up on charges of Treason if we go back and look at the Evidence for Things of the Spirit.

And it is not just with Catholicism. Hindu Yoga and Meditation Sects, the Sufis, and some of the Buddhist Schools, as well as some Primitive Shamanistic Schools have had Saints, and documented instances of Survival of Soul.

To say that we have no evidence is simply to wear the blinders implaced by the Dogmas of modern science. And it is Dogma. I've seen it in action. In France, at the Shrine of Our Lady of Lourdes, a committee of 40 Medical Doctors got together and with a rigourous procedure validated some hundred 'miracles' at the shrine. The rest of the Scientific Community discredited them with a circular Logic which goes like this -- any Scientist who would validate a Miracle is no longer a Scientist who can be trusted. The same occurred when the Sterling Hospital in India validated a Miracle Working yogin by the name of Pralad Jnani who has spent the last 60 years without eating or drinking a thing. What we have is the Scientific Community at large openly tossing out the credentials of any of their colleagues who break with the solid ranks of Institutional Atheism.

As thinking people we should pay attention to the Emperical Evidence and ignore the partylines, propagandas and Dogmas of the Scientific Community.

Moving this to Philosophy since it has little to do with dreaming.