Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (62789)	10/17/2002 6:34:17 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

I cannot take seriously the scale by which someone determines what is fact and what is opinion when my assertion of my area of residence is taken as subjective and an opinion. Nor is inference the distinguishing mark of opinion, since a valid inference from compelling evidence may very well result in a determination of fact. To me, the difference between fact and opinion is this: would a reasonable person be capable of advancing a different hypothesis? Not, be it noted, is a different hypothesis possible, but is it reasonable? The jury is spoken of as making determinations of fact, according to the criterion "beyond a reasonable doubt". On the same basis, if I consider something beyond a reasonable doubt, then I advance it as a fact. Now, it is possible to advance something as a matter of fact and turn out to be wrong, because it is not absolutely impossible that something different should turn out to be true, or that the information was poorly conveyed. Some residual fallibility is not, however, a sufficient cause to portray everything as a matter of opinion, since opinion implies a fairly high degree of unsettledness or doubtfulness........