4 ms·
It's not really a difference of opinion though is it? Whether the day is nice or not is a matter of opinion. Whether this is a tasty meal is a matter of opinion
by kolektiv 8y ago
It's not really a difference of opinion though is it? Whether the day is nice or not is a matter of opinion. Whether this is a tasty meal is a matter of opinion. Whether anyone else wrote works in C minor is a matter of fact - or not, and he's provided evidence that shows that other people did - fact established.
This is the whole problem occurring these days - too many things are seen as "well, it's a valid opinion". No, if it's claiming something which can be falsified, it's not an opinion it's a mistake (charitably - if it's done with less than wholesome intention it's something else - a lie).
- austincheney 8y ago> Whether anyone else wrote works in C minor is a matter of fact - or not Not exactly. That is likely a statement of fact, which is a conclusion expressed in a factual manner, but conclusions are still opinions. Facts are atomic data unhinged from description. Journalism is a good example of presenting facts in commentary. You will see language like: "according to the memo, person x wrote song y". Journalism is careful to differ to facts as a point of deflection from invention, because when they are fail at such they tend to get sued and lose. Also, facts are never true or false. Facts are either valid or invalid according to other facts. Something that is not falsifiable is probably an ill formed assumption upon logic.
- kolektiv 8y agoI... get where you're coming from here, but I'm not sure I'm going to agree. Sure, yes, to some extent you can go all the way to Descartes and believe nothing but your own existence. But back to those works in C minor - there's a lot of evidence of them. Recordings. Sheet music. Orchestras who claim to have performed them, and so on. Now sure, you can say that all of those things are also assertions and not facts but at some point the onus flips, and it's going to be on you to provide some reason for why those things should be disregarded. If you're not going to operate on a basis of "reasonable doubt until falsified by a better theory" then you're where? In an entirely post-fact state, where sure, everything's an opinion. And sure, if you want to be there, nobody has a right to stop you but it's not a very productive state. Yes, journalists tend to be pretty careful with claims around things where there is reasonable doubt. But there is a reason journalists are not still writing about Mozart and using careful phrasing like "and it is also believed by some sources that other composers may have composed comparable works in the same key". For humanity to work we have to go with "fact until shown not to be" otherwise we wouldn't make it through a day.