TED Conversations

Austin Williams

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

What really separates opinion from fact?

Some opinions are more informed than others. Some facts are more specific than others. We can misinterpret a fact, and come to a different opinion from what the fact was trying to state or show. Is it still a fact that I know even if I misinterpret it? And can any opinion be completely separated from all facts?
Are facts and opinions completely different from one another?
And are your answers to these questions based on fact or opinion?
How do you know that what you think is fact isn't just your own biased and limited opinion?

0
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Jun 9 2013: Opinion is personal and can change from person to person.

    Fact is universal and does not change.

    If it is not universal and changes than it is not a fact.
    • Jun 9 2013: Well it used to be universally known that the earth was flat. Is/was that a fact? And some people still believe it. And that the evidence of a round earth is a conspiracy by NASA.
      • Jun 11 2013: No, but it is a fact that it seemed to be fairly flat from the points that those who were mistaken saw it.
        • Jun 11 2013: But, at that time, it was a fact. But it changed. So how do we know, for a fact, that that facts we know, are really facts that we know (and that they won't change)?
      • Jun 12 2013: You're still missing the point: fact: it looked flat. Wrong conclusion: it was flat. It was not a fact that it was flat. It was a fact that people saw it flat.
        • Jun 12 2013: So how do we know that what people see now is fact? How do we know that our current conclusions are right? People had wrong conclusilons before, so what makes our current conclusions more right? How do we conclude fact?
      • Jun 12 2013: We know that what they see is fact. What we don't know is if what they interpret is fact. Our conclusion may or may not be "right" but we can know if they are more "correct" because we are able to better predict behaviours and such from our current interpretations:
        http://chem.tufts.edu/answersinscience/relativityofwrong.htm

        But I suspect that you only care about continuing the discussion, rather than be even a little interested in understanding the answers. As you seem to show below.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.