Chris, you lost me.

J, I never claimed you should make a large effort. But given any level of effort, there is your best estimate given that effort, and you have no right to believe anything else.

I must disagree. When I have finite resources I must estimate how many of those resources are worth devoting to my answer for any particular question.

The best estimate for how many resources to devote to finding a particular best estimate, depends on everything else that’s worth my attention. I won’t find out how much attention each topic is worth until I have thoroughly explored it in the context of everything else I know.

This is not a trivial problem to solve. I say that an ethic which demands I must correctly solve a problem I cannot solve, is a bad ethic.

When people retort a statement of fact I make with “That’s just your opinion,” I correct them by saying that it’s not an opinion at all — it’s a belief, and our beliefs (as is often the case is exchanges like these) cannot both be correct at the same time.

That’s why I can like the color blue and never be wrong, but I can be wrong if I’m a [insert pet hated religion or movement practitioner], since said movement makes claims of fact about reality.

You are correct though, Robin, in that once I hold an opinion about the color blue, there is a claim of fact to be made about what my favorite color truly is, but I think that’s kind of pedantic since I can honestly and truly change my favorite at will, since it’s a property of me not of the color.

Granted that there is a ‘best’ estimate for any information situation and therefore like you say, one is only entitled to their best honest effort to find that best estimate, cannot individuals come to different conclusions as to what the best estimate is, depending on how they value different pieces of that information set?

Different individuals could come to different ‘best’ judgements about what ‘ought’ to be because even with the ’same’ information situations, some could think certain aspects of that information is more important than other aspects.

For example, I’m thinking of different ways of assessing social justice.

That is, someone who makes a statement such as – citing the next thread on the board – “How many apples are on the tree?” and someone says with feigned authority “Oh, about 350.”

I’ve been in the military, I’ve been in small business, and corporate America, and there is a typical trait among many leaders. They feel some kind of pressure to always have an answer, and will give unqualified opinions when in certain cases, “I don’t know, but I’ll find out” would do much better.

I was under the impression that this “opinion-as-fact” example might not apply until I read the next thread up concerning the Instant Message, and so now I think it fits.

If I go to someone I respect and trust, and say “I have a very lucrative deal concerning an apple tree I haven’t seen. All I need to know is how many apples are on the tree, approximately anyway.” And the trusted fellow says “350″ instead of “Hmm, I don’t know, but it’s such and such month, the tree is currently in X climate. If I were you, I’d google apple trees in that area, and make an educated guess as to how many should be on the tree this time of year.”

Otherwise, “I don’t know” would much less harm. But on the more basic point of simply having a discussion on general topics, there is a balance involved, and discretion to be considered. Some people aren’t worth the trouble of sharing opinions with.