"FACTS AND OPINIONS"

We hear every day about the ongoing battle between ‘fact’ and ‘opinion’. Facts are an agreement of truths known by actual experience or observation of the available evidence that is accepted and known to be true by more than one individual. Corroboration of the quantitative and qualitative assets or characteristics of the evidence by more than one observer is necessary in order for the evidence to be verifiable and accepted as ‘facts’. If many observers agree on the ‘facts’ it is said to be more valid than just two observers because of the similarities in observable evidence experienced by many individuals. Facts reveal the truth of our perceived dualistic reality. They exist ‘apart from’ and not ‘colored by’ any observer.

An ‘opinion’ is a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty because all of the associated facts have not been corroborated. It is a personal view, attitude, or appraisal of the ‘facts’ which are skewed by a person’s emotional reaction to the facts. It is a ‘reaction to’ an event circumstance, situation, occurrence or behavior of people or things. An opinion is formed either ‘after’ facts have been ‘observed’ or ‘before’ they have been observed. In the former, the reaction to a set of facts causes either fight or flight from the experience of those facts. In the latter, an anticipation of perceived results that are not desired creates a reaction of either indulgence or avoidance of possible experiences in one’s environment.

An opinion is a secondary reaction to a set of facts. The initial reaction to a set of facts is to run toward them or run away from them. The secondary reaction is to form an opinion of a set of facts as to their expression as being ‘the way it is’. Our egos then determine whether or not the ‘facts’ are aligned with our subconscious beliefs and we either reject or resist the experience of the facts or accept or allow their expression to be held as truth. Rejection and acceptance are ‘mental constructs’ that occur ‘without’ significant emotional drive where resistance and allowance are ‘emotional constructs’ that occur ‘with’ significant emotional expression.

Resistance is the emotional drive of ‘fight/flight’ and allowance is the emotional drive of ‘letting go’. Resistance truly is futile because it keeps us trapped in ‘reacting’ to facts instead of dealing with them ‘as they are’. We either observe the facts through direct experience or we believe what someone else has observed with direct experience. In other words, we trust what we sense or we trust what someone else senses. Aside from first-hand experience in the unfolding of current events, the only observations of what has occurred in the past are in viewing historical media available on what ‘actually’ happened.

How much of the ‘truth’ of what has occurred can be corroborated? This takes an active role in researching what archival evidence is available in the library or on the Internet. To create an ‘informed opinion’, one must put in the time to research the available facts. Only after many hours of painstaking research can one derive enough supporting evidence to back up their opinion as being plausible; that it ‘could’ have occurred this way without any major dissenting evidence.

Everyday millions of people blog their opinions on social networking and represent them as facts. A discerning mind will reject this off the bat and demand supporting evidence from at least three corroborative sources; not just one article by a zealot who wants to convince you of their opinion by skewing the available facts to support their position. Without discernment, most people will blindly accept what is said as fact without corroboration because it is what they ‘want’ to believe to begin with; it aligns with the agenda they want to see manifested.

Discernment is an acute ‘mental’ function that evaluates facts and information ‘without’ emotionalizing them to fit an agenda. Judgment is an ‘emotional’ function that evaluates behaviors as being acceptable or unacceptable based on one’s own experience in life. Both discernment and judgment involve ‘separating’ and ‘isolating’ experience from the person who is experiencing it; however, judgment goes one step further and uses its own experience to impose upon another its ‘values’ without taking into consideration what the other person has directly experienced and how their life lessons have taught them ‘how’ to react.

Discernment embraces and deals ‘only’ with the facts whereas judgment deals with one’s own observations of the facts and what one values as their opinion of the facts. Facts have more ‘truth’ than opinions and like the saying goes about a**holes, everybody has one. As the once President of the United States John Adams said, “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictums of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”

Many will try to alter the facts to suit their opinions. It is up to you to discern the facts and separate the chaff from the wheat. Go to the library, surf the net and consult others; always get at least three corroborative sources of information on the evidence before you wholeheartedly form an opinion. We will all become closer to the truth as a result and learn that our opinions are not necessarily how things ‘are’. Invest time in meditation and ‘feel’ what the truth is after your investigation.

The Divine will lead you to people, places and things that will either support or deny your opinions. Trust is always the last part of truly knowing. Be thankful for your experiences, the facts you observe and the informed opinions you embrace. Always make sure they are centered in the truth of the Divine. ~Dean A. Banks, D.D.

©2016 Dean A. Banks, D.D. All Rights Reserved.