ZooChat Cup Match #27: Hannover vs Moscow

[BeakerUK]

So as long as there is proof, or a strong enough argument, then they are wrong even if they believe they are right? And in fact they are not right? Man fervently believes he is taller and is adamant that he is right despite the proof. His belief that he is right does not mean he is right?

 

[Shorts]

Then it would be a matter of fact and not opinion.

That's where it gets interesting though. Who's the arbiter of a fact's genuineness?

You suggested before that it is the right result if a majority want it, but what if they're mis-informed and that affected their votes -can that still be considered the right result in that case? I recognise the fact that there may be argument/consensus in the present that a fact's genuine but this conclusion might change over time.

Therefore what's considered right by a majority now (on the basis a majority result is a right result) might be considered wrong in the future based on realisation of mis-information/mis-interpretation at the time (check out some of the facts around wars*, e.g. Vietnam, for that) therefore surely it can't be concluded that a majority result is necessarily a right one (and it's healthy to challenge such assertions).

I think that was the point I was trying to make.

*don't worry, I'm not going to follow Godwin's Law

 

[agnmeln]

So as long as there is proof, or a strong enough argument, then they are wrong even if they believe they are right? And in fact they are not right? Man fervently believes he is taller and is adamant that he is right despite the proof. His belief that he is right does not mean he is right?

That’s about the gist of it.

 

[TeaLovingDave]

What is right? What is wrong? What is true? What is false?

All these are concepts we are well-familiar with.... but have any of us heard tell of zoological collections in Moscow or Hannover?

 

[Shorts]

What is right? What is wrong? What is true? What is false?

All these are concepts we are well-familiar with.... but have any of us heard tell of zoological collections in Moscow or Hannover?

Indeed (good modding).

I blame CGSwans for encouraging vote tampering in his own contests.

Now, back to the thread........

 

[agnmeln]

That's where it gets interesting though. Who's the arbiter of a fact's genuineness?

You suggested before that it is the right result if a majority want it, but what if they're mis-informed and that affected their votes -can that still be considered the right result in that case? I recognise the fact that there may be argument/consensus in the present that a fact's genuine but this conclusion might change over time.

Therefore what's considered right by a majority now (on the basis a majority result is a right result) might be considered wrong in the future based on realisation of mis-information/mis-interpretation at the time (check out some of the facts around wars, e.g. Vietnam, for that) therefore surely it can't be concluded that a majority result is necessarily a right one (and it's healthy to challenge such assertions).

I think that was the point I was trying to make.

In the absence of proven fact in the present, opinion is all that is available to rely upon in the circumstances. And of course, people develop their opinions for many and varied reasons. In these cases, as you said, it’s about a snapshot in time. In the presence of available proven fact in the future, there is then no need to rely upon opinion. What may have initially appeared to have been the right result may well no longer be that way. In which case, it changes the circumstances entirely. But by that point, it’s possibly far too late to change the outcome anyway. What was going to happen has probably happened, and potentially already changed the course of history. It then is what it is.