CHECK YOUR ASSUMPTIONS:

FACTS, INFERENCE AND OPINIONS

Plenty of things are matters of opinion. But others are matters of fact. Say you and your neighbor have just seen a movie and are about to head to your favorite restaurant. You liked the movie, and your neighbor didn't –that's opinion. Then you say Route A is the shortest way to the restaurant, and your neighbor says it isn't– those are facts but facts in dispute. In other words, one of you is right, and the other is wrong.  This generalization holds throughout life's most major issues; some people are wrong and others correct.

Not knowing the difference between opinion and fact makes it difficult to make good decisions. If you believe too much opinion to be fact, you'll be self-righteous and intellectually narrow. If you believe too much fact to be opinion, you'll be gullible and intellectually illogical.

Say you and your neighbor agree there should be less poverty in our country. You propose Plan A; he proposes Plan B. These are not matters of opinion. These are matters of inference – one plan will work better than another. They also may work equally well, of course. However, only one plan will be chosen and tested.

The problem arises on assumptions related to aspects of any plan: The task is not simply separating facts from opinions, but separating facts from strong inferences and separating weak inferences from opinions. The "better" plan presupposes a fact, like the “better plan” has the most valid inference drawn upon facts available at any given time. Facts change as new data appears, hence science is always the sum of facts available at any given time (the present)  for drawing inferences and giving informed opinions. Science was different throughout time as it changes as new facts emerge to support or refute claims to be a fact.

If more people knew the difference between opinion and fact, strong and weak inferences, we would be better prepared to choose better leaders, our leaders would make better decisions, and people could make real progress toward our common goals instead of spending so much time arguing “apples: vs. oranges.”

 

THE STORY

A man and wife had their small house thoroughly redecorated and painted – walls, windows, woodwork. At 5:00 p.m. the decorators left. The man and wife cleaned up the house, locked up their cabinet that contained silverware and then went to bed. The next morning, they found a window open, the cabinet open, and all the silverware missing. The police were called and subsequently found a set of fingerprints on the window sill. The fingerprints were sent to police head-quarters for identification. A reply from headquarters said that the fingerprints on the window sill exactly matched those of a nasty criminal named Joe Bender. Decide if the following are facts, inferences, or opinions. Mark each sentence with an F (fact), I (inference: strong or weak), or O (for opinion).

 

THE STATEMENTS ABOUT THE STORY

1. The silverware was stolen.

2. Joe Bender stole the silverware.

3. At sometime yesterday between the time the house was

painted and now, Joe Bender was in or around the room.

4. Joe Bender put the fingerprints on the window sill

5. The decorators left at 5:00 p.m.

6. Fingerprints on the window sill exactly matched those of Joe Bender's.

7. The man and wife went to bed before cleaning up the house.

8. Joe Bender had opened the window.

9. The silverware was missing.

10. Joe Bender jimmied the lock to get into the cabinet.