More actions
Traditionally, an opinion is defined as "a view, judgment, or appraisal formed in the mind about a particular matter". We usually distinguish it from fact by noting that facts have "actual existence" or "objective reality".
In the ratings system, however, we consider all views, whether factual or not, as opinions. Therefore any statement made for ratings purposes is considered an opinion. Why do we do this? Well, for one, the ratings system is designed to bring out the nature of the statement made in more complex ways than simply fact or opinion. If it is truly factual, and true (eg the population of NYC is about 8 million), the ratings system will assess it as such. If it is intended to be factual, and false (eg the population of NYC is 1 million), the ratings system will not only flag the error but probably penalize the author as either having lied or being grossly misinformed. If the statement made is an expression of personal preference (eg Picasso paintings are disturbing), the ratings system can properly categorize that too. But there are many shades of personal preference. Much of it is benign (eg "I like Taylor Swift") but some of it borders on acceptability (eg "I don't like gay people"). They are both opinions in the classical sense, but they have implications which the ratings system will bring out. Some statements are difficult to parse (eg "gay people can't have kids") and require context to figure out their true meaning. Other statements are neither fact nor opinion (a greeting, filler statements, statements made for purposes of social etiquette, jokes, etc). The ratings system will generally be good at figuring out intent, which is an important component of expression.
Along these lines we can provide a range to classify statements starting with hard facts.
In addition to properly categorizing statements, the ratings system will bring out the provenance of opinions.
- Is it due to one's trust network? Ie is it a case where one has no personal opinion but is drawing on the opinions of others?
- The public writings of others. Are the sources specified?
- Is it due to independent research?
- Is it due to some verifiable chain of logic or mathematical proof?
- Is it the result of an experiment?
Opinions are complex because they come from many sources. It will be important for the ratings system to understand their origins (XXX, the one on the importance of origins).
On the importance of origins
Last time we mentioned critical race theory (CRT) as an example of a controversial idea that had lost track of its origins, largely because of right wing propaganda. CRT originated as a academic legal theory in the 70s and 80s and held that our laws have systemic racism built in to them. Witness red-lining, a policy by the FHA started in 1934 which refused to insure mortgages in African American neighborhoods while simultaneously subsidizing suburban housing as long as it was for whites. The policy, reflecting widely held racist beliefs of its time has evolved into restrictive zoning practices found all across the US today. For example, Cobb County, GA, a large suburban area north of Atlanta does not permit mobile homes or the extension of Atlanta mass transit into its jurisdiction. The reason for this is tacitly acknowledged to be racial.
The last place you would expect CRT is in public schools but conservatives managed to convince a sizeable share of the public that it was being taught to young children. Of course, by not defining the term exactly (and avoiding its precise origins) they were able to do precisely that and convert CRT into the bogeyman that it now is.
Our rating system should encourage author identification, proper attribution, and source tracing.