And That’s a Fact… Or is it?
Facts and Feelings
It seems that many people these days struggle to distinguish factual statements from opinions, and it is causing some serious issues within society. I can’t tell you how many social media discussions I’ve seen devolve into attempts to change another person’s opinion, which, more often that not, ends up a fruitless endeavor. Beyond this, the volume of people who are sharing their interpretation as “fact” is immensely frustrating.
The way that a person feels about something is not a fact. The significance that a person infers is not a fact. The actions that they feel are necessary are not objective, they’re opinion. Opinion statements, or interpretations, cannot be proved or disproved because they represent a person’s beliefs and emotions about a given topic.
Conversely, factual statements, by definition, are not based on opinion. They may be biased, certainly, but they are not based upon a subjective interpretation. Factual statements can be proved or disproved with data.
Let’s take a look at a recent example that’s been thrown around a lot lately: In 2018 (the most recent data available at the time of this writing) the U.S. imprisonment rate of Black men was 5.8 times higher than white men.
This is a factual statement – it can be proved or disproved by research (looking up CNN or Fox News articles does not count as research, you need to look at primary sources as much as possible). These numbers are based on real-world counts that can be verified, and they come from the U.S. Department of Justice 2018 report, “Prisoners in 2018.”
This statement alone is noteworthy, but not up for debate because it can be proven.
Where things get tricky is the inference made about why this is true. This is largely up for interpretation. In this example, some people believe that this difference is due to inherent differences between Black and white people. Others, like myself, strongly believe that there are other factors that impact this difference, including racial targeting by law enforcement, disproportionate poverty, employment discrimination, social conditioning, etc.
Either way, the interpretations are opinions, and they cannot be proven or disproven because they center around how we feel about the information.
Now, this is not to say that other facts can’t inform opinion. Often, there are multiple angles that play into the formation of an opinion. And even then, many (if not most) opinions are based on an extremely limited set of factual statements. It gets tangled easily, but the base definitions remain true: factual statements can be proven or disproven with data, whereas opinion statements cannot.
Sadly, many people struggle to differentiate the two. A 2018 study from Pew Research looked at people’s ability to distinguish factual statements from opinion statements and found that an abysmal 26% of respondents were able to correctly identify all the factual statements, and 35% were able to correctly identify all the opinion statements. On top of this, political party alignment played a role in people’s rating of statements as factual- or opinion-based: if the statement aligned more closely with their own personal beliefs and values, they were more likely to rate the statement as factual.
As much as we love to view ourselves as objective observers, we are riddled with personal biases that shape our understanding of the world and, in turn, of new information, whether factual or opinion. These biases are extremely human, and most people suffer from them whether they’re aware of them or not. So, let’s take a closer look at two core biases that can impact this misunderstanding of fact vs opinion.
Confirmation Bias
As humans, we have an inherent bias to believe only the facts that back up our previously-held beliefs – it’s one of our numerous malfunctioning thought processes. If we have a deeply-held opinion and are presented with a fact that seems counterintuitive to our opinion or belief, we tend to reject it as false. It’s a cognitive defect that everyone suffers from and is extremely difficult to shake, even after becoming aware of it. I studied these kinds of cognitive biases in college, and still fall victim to them!
Here’s a very recent example: I am in full support of de-funding the police to re-invest in community services. I have a close social circle that largely (though not unanimously) holds similar beliefs, and find deep inspiration in the countless community leaders, particularly Black community leaders, who are at the forefront of this charge to fundamentally alter our approach to violence prevention. There are many facts that impact my opinion on this approach, and I made an unconscious assumption about how the Black community felt about policing in their neighborhoods – specifically, I assumed that they’d like to see less of it.
Quick clarification: I do not in any way believe that Black people hold homogenous beliefs. I assumed this because I was projecting how I thought I might react to being disproportionately targeted – another cognitive bias that doesn’t always serve our better interests.
But, a recent poll actually indicates otherwise. A 2020 poll conducted by Gallup found that 81% of Black Americans want police to spend the same amount of time (61%) or even more time (20%) in their neighborhoods.
When my partner first told me this, my immediate impulse was to reject the data because it did not fit with the story I had in my head. I grilled him about who conducted the poll, any possible bias in the organization or questions, where and how people were asked about the topic – all important questions to ask about any new data. However, my interrogation was not fueled by curiosity about the truth, but by a desire to disprove this factual statement that ran counter to the picture I crafted in my head. A picture I had painted using various facts, interpretations, projections, and analyses that still boiled down to an assumption. An opinion.
Even after learning and accepting this new information, my opinion about the best approach to addressing community care remains the same. I continue to stand confidently behind de-funding the police, and I am grateful to have another fact to consider as I continue to learn, grow, and develop my perspective. Because that’s the thing about opinions: you can learn and accept new information without necessarily changing your personal stance. That’s your prerogative as an independent human who’s in charge of their own thoughts and beliefs.
Not all new information is going to sway you one way or another, but it is critical to analyze and consider information that might not match up perfectly with the story that you have in your head. Rejecting a fact simply because it does not align with your assumptions and opinions is a cognitive pitfall that will keep you from developing a full, in-depth, and informed stance. It drives our human tendency to favor our own personal emotions over the larger societal wellbeing. Overcoming this detriment means maintaining an open mind when absorbing new information, even if it doesn’t end up swaying your stance one way or another.
Cherry Picking
Another very human shortfall when it comes to facts and opinions is the tendency to carefully select which data to use and share, while omitting any other data that might run counter to the story that we have in our heads. This actually relates closely to the bias we just touched on, and is considered part of the confirmation bias as a whole.
To better understand the problem of cherry-picking data, we need to take a data journey. Consider this widely-shared fact: Between 2000 and 2018 (the most recent year of data available from the CDC), the number of Black people who were killed by police firearms increased 51%. This on its own is horrifying, but there’s more to the story.
It’s critical to note that during this same period, the number of white people killed by police firearms increased by even more, 112%. This is the place where most “all lives matter” supporters stop, and, while alarming, it is still nowhere near the whole picture.
When looking at data there’s a critical component that often gets purposefully omitted: context. Raw numbers can certainly be helpful – and in this case we can see that the current police state violence is a problem across the board. But, raw numbers are only a prologue.
To understand what these numbers mean, we have to understand how they compare to the population as a whole. For example, Group A sees 70 out of 100 people killed (a death rate of 70%), and Group B sees 300 out of 1,000 people killed (a death rate of 30%). If we were to only look at the raw numbers, we would see 70 dead versus 300 dead and come to the false conclusion that Group B was more impacted. But, we would be intentionally ignoring the significance of those numbers. When looking at the rates of death, 70% vs 30%, it becomes obvious that Group A has been disproportionately affected.
With this in mind, let’s revisit those raw numbers and see how they stack up with a little more context.
If both groups were targeted equally, we would expect that their rates of death by police firearm would be the same, even if the raw numbers differed. This is clearly not the case. In 2018, the rate of death by police firearm for Black people (0.25) was 56% higher than the rate for white people (0.16).
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, in 2018 white people constituted 73% of the U.S. population. Black people represented 13%. This alone probably doesn’t surprise you, but consider it within the context of the rates we’ve looked at.
Despite having a population that is 60% lower than white people, Black people experience a death-by-police-firearm rate that is 56% higher.
If we were to simply stop at the increase in police firearm deaths for Black and white people (cherry-picking our facts), we would not be looking at the picture as a whole, and would miss the broader societal context. We might falsely conclude that police murder of civilians is a bigger problem for white people, when in fact the population proportions illuminate a different, more accurate story.
It doesn’t mean that white people are not subject to police brutality and murder. But, it does mean that Black people face an overwhelmingly disproportionate amount of police state punishment, violence, and murder.
If we really want to get at the truth, we have to work to overcome our personal tendency to selectively adopt facts into our mental information bank. Examining all the facts within their context is the path to deeper, more meaningful comprehension and opinion formation.
Evaluating Data
With all of this said, it’s imperative to acknowledge the very serious shortcomings in our current system of information study and dissemination. Many studies have some sort of private interest in the topic they’re investigating, and this can cause their own bias to impact the study’s outcome and conclusions. Not even scientists are immune to the confirmation bias, and this is a widely-recognized issue. This bias renders these studies as “one-off” studies that either cannot be or have not been replicated, which means we need to take their data and conclusions with an air of light skepticism. This doesn’t mean that we need to entirely disregard them, but it does mean that we must consider other evidence related to the claim.
If a researcher enters into a study with the intention to prove or disprove something, they will skew their results to fit their own narrative, whether consciously or unconsciously. This is why it’s so critical to know how to evaluate data, even from a surface level.
You don’t need a degree in statistics to ask, “Who conducted this study and do they have any special interests in its conclusion? Where was the study conducted and was it a representative sample? Is there any other evidence to back up this study’s conclusion?”
Often, I recommend looking for meta-analyses or literature reviews to search for a more informed outlook on a given topic. Many times, however, we’re stuck with un-replicated studies that inform our opinions. It’s not ideal, and it’s still better than having no factual basis whatsoever.
I’m not saying it’s easy – doing this background work is tedious! But, it will allow you to practice critical analysis and develop your appetite for the truth, rather than for an oversimplified, biased version of the truth. Practicing this will strengthen your critical thinking skills and better inform your opinion. It will help you build a real case for your interpretation and maybe even help you share information with others so that they will better understand your perspective.
Build Bridges, Not Walls
Mixing up factual statements and opinion statements causes real harm to our societal understanding and dialogue. It drives us apart, as we fail to distinguish an individual’s interpretation from the actual data. Factual statements can be proven or disproven, but opinion statements just are.
We can debate opinions all day, and it probably won’t change anyone’s mind. A more productive discussion is the sharing of factual data that we use to inform our opinion. When we share facts, we share knowledge and understanding. When we ask for others’ facts that they use to form their own opinion, we are seeking genuine truth rather than affirmation of our own biased story.
This process of knowledge sharing builds bridges, rather than walls. Relying solely on interpretations will naturally be rife with bias and emotion. There’s nothing wrong with emotions, and everyone is entitled to feeling their feelings. But, you can’t debate feelings. As much as we would love to, we will rarely change someone else’s mind by sharing our opinions alone. We need to share why we hold that opinion, and seek out an understanding of why they hold their own opinion.
Misunderstanding facts and opinions is at the root of some dangerous rifts in today’s society. People harbor such deep-seated hate for others who do not believe exactly as they do, and it has been a catalyst for further division, violence, and prejudice. Often, this split in opinions relates closely to these factual biases of rejecting and cherry picking information.
It is my hope that the more we understand and clarify what is a factual statement and what is an opinion statement, the better equipped we will be to foster progress and understanding within society. And that’s a fact… or is it? (It’s not.)