Are Opinions Based On Assumptions, Not Facts?

When facts can't shift someone's assumptions, the argument itself starts to look pointless. Suppose a person has decided you're a "hypochondriac" and a "surgery addict." What page of your medical record could you pull out that would move them off that? Probably none. And the sting goes deeper, because in their mind those labels already stand for a bad person.

Assumptions stay assumptions. They can do real damage when they're wrong and get stapled to unflattering traits in someone else. "Oh, that's just a woman for you." "Oh, that's just a man for you." A line like that lets people file away a whole human being in a second, no follow-up questions required, no time spent learning anything more.

Debate is a different animal. It's a structured, almost academic exercise: each side takes its turn making the case for one position, and out of that back-and-forth you can get a careful reading of a situation from both directions. Trial lawyers do exactly this for a paycheck, arguing whichever side they've been assigned, defense or prosecution.

I keep turning this over. A friend put it well recently: plenty of people treat their opinions as facts. That alone explains why so many conversations get difficult. People also gather into tribes and wrap their identity around them, say, "Trump Supporters," and when someone walks in with a belief that cuts against the tribe, it registers as a threat. Anxiety shows up. Sometimes anger. There's a reason the old advice warns you off sports, politics, and religion at the dinner table.

Related