You avoided the points I was trying to make and went on about how I was changing the sub-topic.
and I really don't have much interest in your convoluted reasoning
Well, if you didn't read it, you can't really talk about me "avoiding your points", now can you?
All you've ever addressed, ever, was me pointing you to your mistake - but hey, feel free to go around accusing me of "avoiding", regardless.
about the well established and defined meanings of "facts" and "opinions" being wrong.
Me:
"Having that said, please quote a single line from my last response, or ANY post ever posted by me, where I actually challenged the meanings of fact, fiction, or opinion."
Which you didn't do.
What was that bit with "facts", they have to be "corraborated", right?
It's funny how you go around claiming I was challenging dictionary definitions (while all I was challenging, was the graphic's and YOURS - how tall are you?), right after telling me how disinterested you are in reading any of that.
If you're so hung up on "dictionaries", here's a thing: dictionaries usually contain MULTIPLE meanings of the same word.
Like, "opinion" can have the meaning of "taste", as well as that of an insufficiently proven view of some situation (which wouldn't have anything to do with "taste" anymore).
So if I point out this obvious distinction, and how there is a number of different notions that can be called "an opinion", and you should better define what kind you're referring to, I'm not really challenging the dictionary, I SUPPORT it.
But I agree with you on one thing, I really do challenge the dictionary when I make a distinction between "fact" and "knowledge", and saying it would make for a more precise juxtapposition to "opinion".
Not sure if I challenge the established terms if I say that an opinion, as such, is a fact, but not its content. Like, the fact that an important individual, or a percentage of a population, has a certain "opinion", can be part of a statistic as well, and influence education programs and marketing strategies while at it, but its content isn't factual. You tell me.
But challenging some sloppy post of yours is obviously the same as going against the academic community, in your perception. No comment required.