A fact is information minus emotion....

[Soloist]

Sometimes it only seems complicated because we aren't being very analytical.

Can a man be a woman? By what definition? Can an XY be an XX? I don't think so. Can an XY put on a dress and lipstick? Sure. I don't think people generally disagree about anything I would call a fact on this issue. I think we would also agree that some XYs consider themselves to be women and would like others to consider them women and would like others to use the pronouns that we traditionally use for women when we talk to them. That's not really a dispute about facts. Treating it as a dispute about facts merely clouds the issue. This is really a dispute about values and wisdom.

Did Russia drop a bomb here or not? That's really a question of evidence - and evidence that neither you nor I have direct access to. But by now, I suspect that most people with a healthy relationship to truth would conclude that Russia has dropped quite a few bombs in Ukraine. In research, we often ask what the rules are for evidence, how it's being evaluated in a given context.

IS your statement of XY not being able to be XX a fact or an opinion? The argument in those circles has never been about chromosomes, they try to side step them because its too exacting and things like XY/XX mosaic is too rare to make a compelling argument.
99% of facts are founded on opinions.

[Bootstrap]

Sometimes it only seems complicated because we aren't being very analytical.

Can a man be a woman? By what definition? Can an XY be an XX? I don't think so. Can an XY put on a dress and lipstick? Sure. I don't think people generally disagree about anything I would call a fact on this issue. I think we would also agree that some XYs consider themselves to be women and would like others to consider them women and would like others to use the pronouns that we traditionally use for women when we talk to them. That's not really a dispute about facts. Treating it as a dispute about facts merely clouds the issue. This is really a dispute about values and wisdom.

Did Russia drop a bomb here or not? That's really a question of evidence - and evidence that neither you nor I have direct access to. But by now, I suspect that most people with a healthy relationship to truth would conclude that Russia has dropped quite a few bombs in Ukraine. In research, we often ask what the rules are for evidence, how it's being evaluated in a given context.

IS your statement of XY not being able to be XX a fact or an opinion? The argument in those circles has never been about chromosomes, they try to side step them because its too exacting and things like XY/XX mosaic is too rare to make a compelling argument.

I think you just said that it's a fact - and that people sidestep it because that part is actually straightforward.

99% of facts are founded on opinions.

If you put a dress and lipstick on an opinion, does it make it a fact? I guess that depends on your definitions. But to me, I think 99% of the problem is that people are claiming absolute truth when they don't actually have evidence for their claims. Their emotional talking point is The Truth™.

[Soloist]

I think you just said that it's a fact - and that people sidestep it because that part is actually straightforward.


If you put a dress and lipstick on an opinion, does it make it a fact? I guess that depends on your definitions. But to me, I think 99% of the problem is that people are claiming absolute truth when they don't actually have evidence for their claims. Their emotional talking point is The Truth™.

I wasn't disagreeing with your statement. Evidence has the same problem though that truth has. What is truth is the primary issue. Are there things that society believes are facts that are indeed wrong? sure but how do you argue that their facts are true or not? Someone can present evidence and the another says that evidence is subjective even if its objective. I'm sure you can see from many discussions on here that truth is relative to a user's viewpoint and facts even if they are facts are not accepted as facts.

[Bootstrap]

I'm sure you can see from many discussions on here that truth is relative to a user's viewpoint and facts even if they are facts are not accepted as facts.

Unlike a research setting, we almost never get to the point that we agree on things like rules of evidence. How do you know if a claim is true or not? That usually depends on the kind of claim.

Few people would be willing to apply the same criteria to both Republicans and Democrats, stating clearly what those criteria are. When I try to get people to start with that, they mostly just get annoyed. But it's hard to have a discussion where fact plays a major role unless we do precisely that, slowing down, thinking carefully about how we know if something is true.

Usually, it's more like, "my tribe says it, I believe it, that settles it". For things that are not closely related to Christian belief or biblical teaching. We have too many identities and loyalties that are not based on the Bible or Jesus.

[Soloist]

Unlike a research setting, we almost never get to the point that we agree on things like rules of evidence. How do you know if a claim is true or not? That usually depends on the kind of claim.

Few people would be willing to apply the same criteria to both Republicans and Democrats, stating clearly what those criteria are. When I try to get people to start with that, they mostly just get annoyed. But it's hard to have a discussion where fact plays a major role unless we do precisely that, slowing down, thinking carefully about how we know if something is true.

Usually, it's more like, "my tribe says it, I believe it, that settles it". For things that are not closely related to Christian belief or biblical teaching. We have too many identities and loyalties that are not based on the Bible or Jesus.

If we can't even agree on what Jesus taught and what is true for Christianity, what makes you think anyone here could actually agree with your view of facts?

And after the Civil War, our own federal government acquired a great deal of power over the states that it did not have previously - a lot of that involved making sure that states and towns also follow the Bill of Rights. Did a slave have more representation when his state could enshrine slavery? Did individuals have more freedom when the state church was at the state level rather than the federal level?

Is responding to a point about the state and federal being basically the same thing and your counter point about slavery or state church just simply an emotional argument?

[Sudsy]

It is puzzling to me how the Holy Spirit is not mentioned when it comes to knowing truth.

We don't need opinions on how to live our lives and we certainly can't figure things out with our brains using human logic as 'the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.' 1 Cor 1:25. "For all who are allowing themselves to be led by the Spirit of God are sons of God." Romans 8:14

Ignorance and studity are what happens when we don't allow the Holy Spirit to be our guide and to lead us into all truth.

We share many opinions here on this forum, myself included, but how many of our opinions come from the guidance of the Spirit. If He is not recognized as our source of knowing truth, then we haven't even begun to be led into more truth. I believe, most of the time, we Christians listen to other voices rather than His 'still small voice' to guide us into the truths He wants us to know.

So, now that I said this, was it Spirit led or my opinion ? This depends on one's spiritual discernment. It could be my opinion or it could be that I was led to share some truth. We must be careful to not be led by man's opinions no matter how logical they may sound or how much experience one has to form an opinion.

If you don't agree, then that is your opinion.

[Soloist]

It is puzzling to me how the Holy Spirit is not mentioned when it comes to knowing truth.

We don't need opinions on how to live our lives and we certainly can't figure things out with our brains using human logic as 'the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.' 1 Cor 1:25. "For all who are allowing themselves to be led by the Spirit of God are sons of God." Romans 8:14

Ignorance and studity are what happens when we don't allow the Holy Spirit to be our guide and to lead us into all truth.

We share many opinions here on this forum, myself included, but how many of our opinions come from the guidance of the Spirit. If He is not recognized as our source of knowing truth, then we haven't even begun to be led into more truth. I believe, most of the time, we Christians listen to other voices rather than His 'still small voice' to guide us into the truths He wants us to know.

So, now that I said this, was it Spirit led or my opinion ? This depends on one's spiritual discernment. It could be my opinion or it could be that I was led to share some truth. We must be careful to not be led by man's opinions no matter how logical they may sound or how much experience one has to form an opinion.

If you don't agree, then that is your opinion.

The Holy Spirit does not lead people into sin. The vast majority of people arguing for truth being from the Holy Spirit don't agree with each other and to involve the Holy Spirit in our petty disputes doesn't seem wise.

[Bootstrap]

Usually, it's more like, "my tribe says it, I believe it, that settles it". For things that are not closely related to Christian belief or biblical teaching. We have too many identities and loyalties that are not based on the Bible or Jesus.

If we can't even agree on what Jesus taught and what is true for Christianity, what makes you think anyone here could actually agree with your view of facts?

For the most part, what Jesus said and taught is not even in view in our discussions here. In some ways, it's a lot like our approach to facts. Instead of making it about Jesus, or making it about facts, people do what you just did there.

"What makes you think anyone here could actually agree with your view of facts." That makes it a fight about my views.

Why not focus on Jesus or on facts instead?

Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things.

For the most part, MN is not a place where we do that. We focus on being reactive about things that annoy us or our tribe instead.

[Soloist]

For the most part, what Jesus said and taught is not even in view in our discussions here. In some ways, it's a lot like our approach to facts. Instead of making it about Jesus, or making it about facts, people do what you just did there.

"What makes you think anyone here could actually agree with your view of facts." That makes it a fight about my views.

Why not focus on Jesus or on facts instead?

Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things.

For the most part, MN is not a place where we do that. We focus on being reactive about things that annoy us or our tribe instead.

That is sort of the point though, you have facts that people do not agree with and therefore intrinsically tied into a discussion about facts is about self.

[Sudsy]

It is puzzling to me how the Holy Spirit is not mentioned when it comes to knowing truth.

We don't need opinions on how to live our lives and we certainly can't figure things out with our brains using human logic as 'the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.' 1 Cor 1:25. "For all who are allowing themselves to be led by the Spirit of God are sons of God." Romans 8:14

Ignorance and studity are what happens when we don't allow the Holy Spirit to be our guide and to lead us into all truth.

We share many opinions here on this forum, myself included, but how many of our opinions come from the guidance of the Spirit. If He is not recognized as our source of knowing truth, then we haven't even begun to be led into more truth. I believe, most of the time, we Christians listen to other voices rather than His 'still small voice' to guide us into the truths He wants us to know.

So, now that I said this, was it Spirit led or my opinion ? This depends on one's spiritual discernment. It could be my opinion or it could be that I was led to share some truth. We must be careful to not be led by man's opinions no matter how logical they may sound or how much experience one has to form an opinion.

If you don't agree, then that is your opinion.

The Holy Spirit does not lead people into sin. The vast majority of people arguing for truth being from the Holy Spirit don't agree with each other and to involve the Holy Spirit in our petty disputes doesn't seem wise.

Why not ? If we are given Him as our guide, should He not be part in 'our petty disputes' ? Perhaps if He was allowed to be involved those petty disputes would not arise.