Fact Checking and Separating Fact From Opinion

by Robert Wilkinson

In the Spirit of Neptune's entry into Pisces, I thought today we could review the importance of critical thinking, and knowing how to distinguish fact from opinion.

If Neptune in Pisces symbolizes a long term collective dreamscape where we will all experience heightened feelings, then it will be necessary to develop tools to examine why we perceive what we perceive, and why we believe, think, or know something is as it is, or not as it seems to be. While we can learn that the Thinker, the Thinking, and the Thought are never separate from each other, we can also learn how to stand aside from all of these and cultivate critical thinking skills so we don't get trapped in unsupportable assumptions.

Even for those with an advanced training in true Intuition (not to be confused with hunches or "psychic" impressions), it will still be equally necessary to be able to use our minds constructively as we navigate the infinite impressions streaming in from collective consciousness. In short, we all need to cultivate our "glamour dispelling mechanism," or in other terms, our illusion detector.

We do this by finding a way of viewing or hearing whatever with as much detachment, dispassion, and discrimination as possible. This is where we learn to distinguish fact from opinion and objective narratives from subjective rhetoric.

Discrimination involves analysis and judgment. We cannot escape cultivating these while also cultivating detachment and dispassion concerning what and how we analyze and the judgments we come to resulting from our often imperfect perceptions. A sense of humor and perspective go a long way in helping us overcome ego interferences.

To the end of helping us all with our "fact checking" tools, I would like to introduce you to "The Fact Checker" at the WaPo, Glenn Kessler, a man with some pretty serious cred among journalists. He fact checks political statements and figures out to what degree they are accurate or inaccurate. He has a system called "The Pinocchio Test," where he assigns one to four "Pinocchios" depending on the level of omissions, misrepresentations, and unintentional and intentional lies. (Political junkies take note!)

I believe he's a reasonable, intelligent person, and has some interesting criteria for determining fact from opinion and how to figure out what information is trustworthy or suspect. His fact checking tools offer us ways to develop critical thinking skills. The following are some important themes in fact checking.

First, we must determine whether someone is stating a fact or opinion before we check on the accuracy of what's said. So how can we distinguish between a fact that stands on its own, and a "fact" used to support an opinion?

I have found that many times the difference between a fact and an opinion is blurred for self-serving reasons. My technique is to ask myself why that specific assertion is being made using that specific language, and evaluate who benefits from that assertion, or is made stronger or weaker by that assertion.

Through "following the money," we can learn how to distinguish when supposed "facts" are really assumptions, or things taken out of context to serve the ends of the one who is asserting those "facts." Details being pesky things, by asking some questions we may find some clarity:

Can those "facts" lead to other conclusions? How many of those are based on assumptions that may not be true? Do the "facts" being asserted lead to confusion or clarity, simplicity or complexity?

In accepting those "facts" and the conclusions based on them, how much requires a leap of faith or an assumption that may not come true in the future? Does this person have an "axe to grind?" Again, who benefits from the assertion, and whose ox is being gored? What end is served by that assertion of supposed "facts?"

By examining some of these things, we can come to know when supposed "facts" are merely opinions. While there are "learned opinions," these stem from experience and expertise along lines that often exclude more than they include. So even "learned opinions" must be taken with the proverbial grain of salt, since there are many "learned opinions" out there that may or may not be relevant to the facts we're trying to get clear about.

Another principle in fact-checking is that it's important to discriminate between the important and unimportant, lest we find ourselves chasing our shadows, distracted by a thousand nit-picks. Discrimination requires prioritization and ordering the focus in terms of what is core and what is peripheral.

Keep the focus on what facts are at issue, ignore attacks and negative assertions based in ego and personality dysfunctions, consider the source while trying not to allow it to bias you, and don't insist on "100% proof," since even that is suspect. Being dispassionate and renouncing bias, stay focused on being as reasonably objective as possible.

His "Pinocchio Test" is pretty good for grading levels of falsehood, and breaking down the various types of dubious assertions. This is where our own life story can help us recognize these types of falsehoods and learn how not be swayed by them in the future.

Stay alert for ways you've been subjected to these different types of falsehoods in the past. This can help you fill some blind spots, and acquire the tools to deal with such unfortunate things in the future should they come across your radar screen.

He gives One Pinnochio for "Some shading of the facts. Selective telling of the truth. Some omissions and exaggerations, but no outright falsehoods." He gives Two Pinocchios for "Significant omissions and/or exaggerations. Some factual error may be involved but not necessarily. A politician can create a false, misleading impression by playing with words and using legalistic language that means little to ordinary people." Obfuscating language is a dead giveaway that something's not kosher!

He gives Three Pinocchios for "Significant factual error and/or obvious contradictions." And finally, he gives Four Pinocchios for "Whoppers." (Some people really do lie with impunity, feeling it's easier to beg forgiveness than face facts that may put them in a bad light. Again, ego finds all kinds of ways to justify its illusions.)

Then there's the importance of knowing when to withhold judgment, since as he notes, "There will be many occasions when it is impossible to render a snap judgment because the issue is very complex or there are good arguments on both sides." This becomes an occasion for gathering more facts until enough light is shed on the assertion or controversy to allow some measure of clarity, whether the controversy is finally resolved or not by this fact finding.

We are exposed to countless ideas and assertions throughout our lives. Some are true to a greater or lesser extent, and some are not. Some are true during one chapter of our life, and not in another.

Many "facts" and opinions we're exposed to are either somewhat erroneous, completely erroneous, or simply not suited for our evolutionary needs. The issue is one of determining what is conditionally real for us as we dance with life and experience, what is unconditionally real, and what is not our dance to do at all, regardless of what others think or our subconscious tapes tell us.

One of the timeless tools we have to get clear about things through lighting the object from a different angle of view is by bouncing our ideas or things we've learned off of others who can be reasonably objective in their responses. Fresh evidence is always a welcome thing so we can come to a well-rounded understanding of anything.

So as you move and groove through the intersections of Fate Street and Freewill Street on Eternity Boulevard, take a moment from time to time to check your perceptions, dropping those that are not relevant while embracing those that are. You have nothing to lose except your blind spots.

© Copyright 2011 Robert Wilkinson

Comments

[Mary]

Thanks for a truly helpful article and yes, the timing is certainly right as both Neptune entering Pisces can cloud things AND the huge procession of planets in Aries can incline us to make snap judgements. There's a lot of Pinocchios out there for sure so recognizing them is vital!
And as someone who has Neptune conjunct my descendent I've grown to be aware of how easy it is to get caught in webs of lies and illusions (intentional or not at times) so this is sound, helpful advice, Robert, many thanks.

[Nicolas]

As usual a very enlightening article. I agree with what has been said. I also have a "tool" to judge or evaluate is what has been said is to be taken into account and if so, how much. What I do is give it an "ethical dye". I try and see (imagine) where would this fact or opinion take me to in ethical terms. Where are we located in ethical terms if such a fact or opinion is follow, taken into account, discard, etc. etc. Many times, if the fact or opinion takes us or improves or ethical thinking-living-action, it is worth while considering it, if on the contrary it sends us into dire straits, the best is to detache ourself from it and discard it ASAP.
Cheers Robert.

[Layli]

Hi, Robert... This was a wonderfully concise and effective article. Any chance you'd give me permission to print it out and share it with my classes (I teach women's studies at a university), of course giving full credit to you? I know you have a "no re-posting" policy on this website, so if you don't feel comfortable, that's completely fine, but I had to ask! Students in the critical disciplines, such as mine, are always looking for ways to be better processors of information, particularly given that so much of it is designed to manipulate people. Let me know. Thanks!!

[Dirk]

Great post! The emotional space you gain by just checking the facts and not inserting judgement with your every move, is huge. This habit alone can change the world for the better.

[Robert]

Hi all - Great additional suggestions about how to view, what we learn, etc. Layli, of course you may share it with your classes. I have no problem with people reprinting my material as long as there's appropriate attribution. And given the limits of my time and the focus of this site, usually it's not appropriate for me to re-post a lot of material out there that requires fact-checking.