12-14-2018, 11:10 PM
(12-14-2018, 10:35 PM)Dill Wrote: If you say my response was "pontificating" and "overly (?) verbose," are you stating a fact or an opinion based upon subjective criteria?
Yes.
Quote:That "lot of words" at least pushed you outside circular definition. (And we may be referring back to them soon, as I suspect your argument harbors an unstated assumption about the equality of all "opinion" and "subjective criteria.")
No it didn't. It solicited unnecessary exposition that any logical adult would not require.
Quote:If someone claims Britain is in the ideal time zone for trade, he could be stating a fact if there is indeed some connection; but for the sake of argument, let's say this positive evaluation of Britain's economic future post-Brexit is based upon "opinion" and "subjective criteria."
Same for the claim that the EU relies too much on the British economy.
How could these statements, whose occurrence you don't dispute, then NOT be factual support for Fisher and Taub's argument that many Brits evince an optimism about Brexit that belies their actual economic reality?
It could be a fact, sure. Any subjective based opinion could be factual. In the absence of said facts we must, however, refer to the opinion as subjective.
Quote:If they are support, then it is unclear why your response should be "That's a fascinating, and 100% subjective, argument." It is an inductive argument, based upon observation of facts--in this case statements by British citizens. If those citizens' statements are "opinion," as opposed to what you call "fact," then that helps Fisher and Taub's conclusion. It does not make THEIR argument "subjective."
Because your link did not contain the facts you allude to above. Hence, their argument must be firmly identified as subjective until these facts are brought forth for consideration.
