First of all, facts are truths about something, and the opinions are someone's beliefs or judgements or points of view, so 'fact' and 'opinion' are not oppsite. The oppsite of a fact is falsehood, whereas an opinion may be true, or it may be false, or it may be neither.
Here is an example, and it is mainly related to 'opinion' side.
Japan insists that the amount of whales that are targets of whaling is increasing rather than decreasing. Due to this, Japan is still continuing whail fishing. However, the investigation about the amount of whails is halfway and accurate data are not released yet.
Regarding this claim and act of Japan, Sea Shepard which is an organization trying to save whales, is opposing Japan's act. They are feeling pitty for whails, so they are against whailing just emotionally, without any certain data.
What we can see from this, is that because respective claims are not based on facts but opinions, we can't juege which is right.
I understand what you are saying in your posting. However, the decision to hunt whales, just like the choice to eat meat, is a moral decision for many people that would not change no matter how many "facts" were gathered. To say that it is just a matter of opinion, or purely an emotional appeal, discounts the importance of the moral component in decision making.
返信削除It is certainly the case that Sea Shepherd will continue to oppose whaling even if Japanese "research whaling" finds that there are more whales in the sea than anyone thought. But, I also think that Japan would want to continue whaling even if they found that there were fewer whales than expected. The Japanese Ministry of Fisheries would simply give another justification, for example, that the whales are eating too many fish, so their population will have to be controlled.
Sea Shepherd would probably admit that their reasons for opposing whaling are not just "fact based." Actually, the Japanese side also relies on arguments that are beyond fact, too, when they say that whaling is part of its tradition and culture (appeal to tradition). It's also a kind of emotional appeal, as well, if they cry out that their culture is being stepped on by people in other countries. Therefore, both sides resort to other sorts of arguments when the "facts" aren't enough or don't back up their positions.
I am interested in the issue related to animals. the reason of it is not only I chose the topic "animal furs" in IE class, but this is worldwide problem. The impressive issue is Sea Shepherd for me. I have watched the movie about Japanese whaling. Some japanese make livings by whaling, but Sea Shepherd disturb it just for their own emotion. It is difficult issue, I think. I don't know which is right, Sea shephed with emotion or Japan with certain data about whale.
返信削除