And we can complicate things more.
There is no fact that can be reported without giving our personal truth (our view of what happened). Even subconscious use of words is altering facts, when we report them, even when trying to be "objective". This is especially true for complex facts.
That's why I smile when people say "that's just a fact". No, that's just your view on facts.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Sure there are. (these could also be from a video recording or other device)
He had white hair, black hair, red hair, etc. Was wearing a green shirt.
Was driving a ford.
There are plenty of facts that don't require you saying motives, or why a person did something.
My example with the pop and saying someone got shot without seeing it was provided as an example in the article exactly to illustrate this.
The facts. Pop sound, guy fell down with a wound in his chest.
What the pop actually was would be the person's perceived truth.
So the facts are what can be described without putting your own interpretation of their meaning into to them.
@tarazkp and @krnel both had interesting replies that explain this in different words.
A video recording is not recording reality, is recording a piece of it, from some angle.
You say green shirt I say shirt with no pictures on it, and we could be both "right".
Pop sound is you reporting a fact. I could say loud sound. You can say wound in the chest or hole in the chest: same fact, different use of word, slightly different truth.
Sure, for simple facts it's easy to agree on truth.
I came to believe the earth is flat by reading an article out of sheer curiosity s to how someone could be so stupid. NOW I AM THE STUPID ONE!