Difference between revisions of "Issuepedia:Reasonably sound opinion"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (moved from "help" to "policy" category) |
m (catg: policy -> Issuepedia/policies) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | [[category: | + | [[category:Issuepedia/policies]][[Issuepedia]] (for now, at least) allows [[Issuepedia:reasonably sound opinion|reasonably sound opinion]]s to be posted as fact. We are tentatively defining this phrase, within the context of Issuepedia alone, to mean: |
* '''Any conclusion which is reasonable given the available data and for which no sound contradictory line of reasoning has yet been encountered.''' | * '''Any conclusion which is reasonable given the available data and for which no sound contradictory line of reasoning has yet been encountered.''' | ||
Revision as of 12:59, 8 October 2009
Issuepedia (for now, at least) allows reasonably sound opinions to be posted as fact. We are tentatively defining this phrase, within the context of Issuepedia alone, to mean:
- Any conclusion which is reasonable given the available data and for which no sound contradictory line of reasoning has yet been encountered.
This definition may be refined further as we run into test cases.
This is part of Issuepedia's policy of encouraging Reinforcement by Contradiction.
Examples
- Refutation of a given argument because of any logical fallacy
- A relatively simple logical argument based on non-contested facts
- Conditional statements, such as "if X is true, then it would seem inevitable that Y..."
- Unsupported statements prefaced by "It seems to me that..." and signed.