| "Controversial" is merely descriptive of the greater uncertainty involved in opinions. Now, it is true that one cannot possibly persuade others without finding something, an argument, an authority, an experience, that carries weight with them, and therefore someone like Land might as well not bother. Indeed, the futility of that argument, and the one with Smart, made them uninteresting to me. But the overall theoretical question of whether there can be facts that are unprovable to others holds some interest to me. They will be regarded as opinions, in the circumstance of controversy, but they may not be. A week or two ago, I gave an example: I may witness a murder, but if the state will not convict on the testimony of one person, and there is no corroboration, I may know the killer is guilty, and not be able to meet the standards of proof exacted by the court. It does not become an opinion, from one perspective, because of that. On the other hand, it is unproven, and therefore remains merely an allegation......... |
