Is there a rigid model for distinguishing opinion, informed opinion and fact consistently and unambiguously?

What makes this confusing is that depending on the context, it's possible to deviate from even the definitions. That is, since e.g. social scientific contexts are non-hard, then it's possible for the subject to decide that "I don't agree with your definition of informed opinion".

  • One person's received wisdom might be another's fake news. Especially in these postmodern days of ours. – user4894 Mar 8 at 7:51
  • No. You can distinguish clear cases, but there are plenty of grey areas, especially in social sciences. Even in physics we have controversies, not just about string theory, but about interpreting quantum mechanics, and even classical mechanics in some cases, like the Norton dome. And there is no escaping challenges to standards of evidence and the burden of proof either. On the other hand, well-conducted social studies generally get traction, if not universal approval. – Conifold Mar 8 at 8:02
  • @Conifold I've been pointed out earlier that having a too "anarchist"/reductionist view on the redundancy of psychology and social science could be questionable. However, could you point me to some theories, which are of the kind you mention? That may get universal approval, or have attained? I believe that in order to do that, they would have to display "axiomatic qualities". However, I'm not yet sure what are "axiomatic qualities" in soc. sci. – mavavilj Mar 8 at 10:36
  • Make a pendulum from a piece of string and a weight. My opinion is that it doesn't matter how heavy the weight is, the pendulum will swing side to side at a rate which is determined only by the length of the string. If you don't believe me, you can try it for yourself. We call this 'empiricism'. THIS, is the way we determine fact from opinion. Anything which you cannot corroborate by experiment, is not 'knowledge', but some form of belief with varying chances of being true. so, some americans landed on the moon in 1969. What experiment are you going to perform to verify that? – Richard Mar 8 at 12:28
  • @Richard No, you reference to a "memory" of an empirical event. It would make little sense to say that "the only thing that exists is that, which you can observe now". It'd invalidate a lot of basic human features, such as the ability to pass and store knowledge. However, in the context of the question, the problem is, "what is socially constructed truth?" or "what are truthful social constructs?". – mavavilj Mar 8 at 12:43

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.