The word fact and opinion are not the same word

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Krazysh0t

While you keep dodging the question of at what point is saying 'too munch spending' become inherent fact?

Never?

I'll jump in with my opinion... I agree it is a fact the government spends too much money. That can be proven by showing what it would take to get out of debt. When you come up with that answer there is only one conclusion. However, what we're spending too much money on is an opinion. for example, maybe we have too many politicians that get payed too much money and have too many expensive benefits. That, by the way, is an opinion i believe in. It's my opinion that military spending is a necessary evil. What I don't know is, how much should it be?

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Comparing micro and macro economics is stupid.

FACT: That is an opinion.

Unfortunately, people often confuse the subject by making the following statement: It is a fact that my opinion of Hillary Clinton is she is very bad.

Your own opinion is a fact that it is your own opinion. But it is not fact that Hillary Clinton is very bad. Many people on the left thought Hillary Clinton was very good. Again, opinions are not facts. Opinions are not lies. Opinions can never be wrong. Anytime you use the word "good" or "bad" you are expressing an opinion.

originally posted by: LogicalGraphitti
I'll jump in with my opinion... I agree it is a fact the government spends too much money.

As you just said. This is an opinion. Not a fact.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Opinions on opinions is missing the point of this thread. Just because you do not agree with someone else's opinion does not make it wrong.

LOL.

Which is why I wrote:

• Facts can be termed 'true'/'false,' 'correct'/'incorrect,' 'right'/'wrong.'
• Opinions can be properly termed 'supported'/'unsupported,' 'strong'/'weak,' 'logical'/'illogical,' 'rational'/'irrational.'

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
"we spend way too much money on the military"

That's a FACT.

Just because somebody says something doesn't mean its inherently an opinion. Otherwise everything would be opinion.

So your posts in this thread I find extremely interesting because it illustrates almost perfectly what I was saying about about how often a opinion can be about how one balances up facts.

So in your opinion you believe we spend to much money on the military, then. you back that statement up with facts
how much the States spends in comparison to other states, you could talk about it its a percentages of GDP, you could look at financial waist and the lists goes on. At the end of this, you take all of these facts, apply just a little bit of logic and you reach the reasonable conclusion that America spends too much on the military. Form there you could even go further and then start arguing that this money could be better spent in other departments, you could question if such a huge military expenditure is necessary and so on.

Yet another person could look at that and take a different view with the same facts, another might argue that America should be spending a much higher percentage on the military because it has fallen over the years and then site those facts. They could talk about facts pointing to increasing risks to the nations security that would justify a larger military budgets and reach the opposite opinion to yourself that actually America does not spend enough on the Military.

Now you add in preconceived political views about the military and that might just be the tipping point, one believes in a political ideology that calls for a strong military they other believes in less military. You could say a pacifist vs a all war monger if you want to use a extreme example.

So in the end what this comes down to is how you balance the facts and your already preconceived notion of the military.

I personally would agree with your opinion for what its worth, but note the word opinion, its not a fact but you can use facts to back it up.

originally posted by: LogicalGraphitti

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Krazysh0t

While you keep dodging the question of at what point is saying 'too munch spending' become inherent fact?

Never?

I'll jump in with my opinion... I agree it is a fact the government spends too much money. That can be proven by showing what it would take to get out of debt. When you come up with that answer there is only one conclusion.

This also seems like an opinion. There are many people who believe that deficit spending is not a problem as long as the percentage of total GDP is small. You may not agree with this assessment, but since the government is printing fiat money the amount of deficit spending being too much is again opinion.

I agree with what you said about what is more important to spend money on. I also have the opinion that too much government spending is wasted on privatization. We are not getting enough results for what is spent from the government. My opinion is the privatization makes our return much worse because of the profit motive. We end up with more expensive government with much worse results.

Again, we need to discuss political facts. And then discuss opinions on public policies or do nothing which is also a valid opinion.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Here. If it gets you to shut up and stop derailing the topic with your personal vendettas I'll tell you what I think of your opinion. I agree. We spend far too much on military spending and it should be cut to pay for more helpful things like social programs or infrastructure development.

Now. Can we get back to the purpose of the thread or do you want to make up more stuff about me and other posters in the thread because we don't want to follow every silly tangent you come up with to derail the thread?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

How is pushing the thought experiment of the boundaries between opinion and fact "derailing the thread"?

Please give us your Opinion.

dfnj2015, is Krazy's assertion about my method of testing such boundaries constituting "derailment" a Fact?

How else do we achieve such a thing without putting it to the test?

And, Krazy, how is doing that become "making stuff up about people" (where did I do that), why do you assert its all some "silly tangent"?

If anyone is derailing the thread, it's you in my opinion. And you know what, if we can go back thru the entire discourse and it turns out to be you getting all hissy fit style, turning this into personal ad hominem then my opinion would become fact. No??

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Something that I find interesting is that when given the topic of opinion vs fact a quite large preportion of people will use the question to put forward thier own opinion on something and try to pass it off as fact.

a reply to: dfnj2015

Something else to consider: "truth" and "fact" are not the same thing. Half truths are facts as well, and a half truth is not a truth at all.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I often agree with your points of views especially on military spending. But I tend to agree with Krazysh0t on this topic that you are expressing opinions and not facts. I mean this most respectfully. People are taking the same information you have much of it is facts and coming to the opposite conclusion. Although I would not have the opinion we do not have enough military spending there are a lot of people who think we need to increase military spending based on the perceived threats we have around the word.

My hope is for a return to civility when it comes to discussions around political facts and opinions around public polices. I really do not want to insult you in any way.

originally posted by: nonspecific
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Something that I find interesting is that when given the topic of opinion vs fact a quite large preportion of people will use the question to put forward thier own opinion on something and try to pass it off as fact.

I find it interesting that when someone takes the concept to the outer limits, several people refuse to answer the punchline question at the heart of it all, allege the person is ruining the discussion, and then blames it all on political ideology.

When the way they're leaving it means there's no possibility of there being a factual answer to the question.

But then acting like that isnt an opinion.

Welcome to crazy world, home of Homo sapiens!!

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
How is pushing the thought experiment of the boundaries between opinion and fact "derailing the thread"?

Please give us your Opinion.

Seriously. Drop the victim complex. You aren't fooling anyone. You stated opinions, declared them as facts, I corrected you then you took offense to that and tried to double down on your assertion that those were indeed facts. You also appeared to be assuming that because I was calling them opinions, that I disagreed with you.

dfnj2015, is Krazy's assertion about my method of testing such boundaries constituting "derailment" a Fact?

How else do we achieve such a thing without putting it to the test?

Easy. The definitions of opinion and fact are rather clear. You don't need to muddy the waters with trick questions. Just follow the definitions. So far, most of the things you've said are opinions, even with ton of factual stats backing them up.

And, Krazy, how is doing that become "making stuff up about people" (where did I do that), why do you assert its all some "silly tangent"?

Because government spending isn't the topic of the OP.

If anyone is derailing the thread, it's you in my opinion. And you know what, if we can go back thru the entire discourse and it turns out to be you getting all hissy fit style, turning this into personal ad hominem then my opinion would become fact. No??

Are you really so childish to attempt a "I know you are but what am I?" argument for being called out for making a #ty argument?

a reply to: dfnj2015

I was asking you if you agree with him that my method observed herein, of putting the bondaries of opinion/fact to the test, was "derailing" / "threatening" the thread.

Since it's your thread the closest we can get to fact about that assertion falls into your hands.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: dfnj2015

Something else to consider: "truth" and "fact" are not the same thing. Half truths are facts as well, and a half truth is not a truth at all.

I appreciate your contribution. I've always thought "truth" is very close to "fact". Truth has a connotative meaning with philosophy and judgment. Facts are simply things like: The sky is blue.

A truth would be something like: The more you know the less you know.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: dfnj2015

I was asking you if you agree with him that my method observed herein, of putting the bondaries of opinion/fact to the test, was "derailing" / "threatening" the thread.

Since it's your thread the closest we can get to fact about that assertion falls into your hands.

I'm fine with your contributions. I don't think you are derailing the thread. It's all good.

I think if you see there's an edge and boundary condition between fact and opinion it's worth exploring. I don't think I see everything the right way. I'm doing my best to see your insight and nuance in the discussion. Again, it's all good!

I was going to add something substantial to this thread, but having read through it so far, it's definitely in the right forum, (political ideology) and cleverly manipulative in its scope. I'm not that easily fooled.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: nonspecific
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Something that I find interesting is that when given the topic of opinion vs fact a quite large preportion of people will use the question to put forward thier own opinion on something and try to pass it off as fact.

I find it interesting that when someone takes the concept to the outer limits, several people refuse to answer the punchline question at the heart of it all, allege the person is ruining the discussion, and then blames it all on political ideology.

When the way they're leaving it means there's no possibility of there being a factual answer to the question.

But then acting like that isnt an opinion.

Welcome to crazy world, home of Homo sapiens!!

I find it interesting that although you were not personally implicated in my accusation you instinctivley knew you were of the type of person I was referring to.

It is a trait in many that they will to continue to argue ther own opinion even when they have been clearly shown that their opinion is of no benefit to the discussion in progress but if they were to politley take thier opinion to a seperate place it would most likley be agreed with.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

That post there is a serious case study in projectionism, bud.

Example of a fact:
In 2013 there were 33,636 deaths by firearm in the USA.

Also a fact:
21,175 of those deaths were suicides.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Is that all you got when cornered? Your rebuttals are weak. Why can't you just admit you were wrong and misidentified your original statement as a fact when it was indeed an opinion? You've been corrected by multiple people now. Not just me and this certainly isn't me projecting. It is a FACT that you were wrong.