The chicken and the egg
Charles Reichley
Published: February 21, 2008
Which came first, the chicken or the egg? This is a question of cause and effect. In the world of opinion writing, it could be phrased as: Which came first, the facts or the opinion? Did someone have an opinion, and then look for facts that would support that opinion? Or did they research the facts and then develop an opinion based on those facts?Published: February 21, 2008
But that suggests a more interesting question. If you start with an opinion before looking at the facts, how did you come up with the opinion? How do you form an opinion without some reason for it? I’m not talking about people who base an opinion on “facts” that turn out to be wrong, but about people who would form an opinion and then try to convince others by twisting facts to support their opinion.
I don’t know how you would form an opinion without facts. It makes no sense to me. But if I understand the typical complaint in letters-to-the-editor, there are a lot of people who assume that others regularly form their opinions based on something other than facts.
For example, I have twice written about the “mandatory” HPV vaccinations for school children in Virginia. Both times a reader has responded that my “real” reasons for “opposing” mandatory vaccinations were “moral reasons.” In the latest, the reader says I “should be honest about [my] objections.”
But it would never occur to me to try to hide my reasons. My reasons are the basis for my opinion, and if I thought that morality was a reason to object to the HPV vaccination, I would argue that in order to persuade others to agree with me. I don’t see how I would convince people if I don’t provide the facts that lead to my opinion.
I understand that people sometimes think their reasons for an opinion would not be persuasive, so they look for a more persuasive argument. That’s not entirely bad — the more ways you can justify an opinion, the stronger that opinion can be. But if your argument is not based on facts, it’s not much of an argument.
For example, the aforementioned reader faults me for not mentioning that the HPV vaccination law contains an “opt-out” clause. This is a valid complaint. In my first article, I alluded to this in my allegorical story about a “mandatory bedtime law,” but didn’t otherwise mention it. My focus was on government overstepping its authority, and with limited space I didn’t think the opt-out clause was important to that argument.
I should have mentioned it so that people reading my column knew they could avoid the requirement. But since I wasn’t trying to get people to not take the vaccine, the thought didn’t occur to me.
I’ve never said people shouldn’t get vaccinated. I said people should discuss the vaccine with their doctors. I know people who oppose the vaccine and people who strongly support it. But my concern really was about government sticking its nose where it didn’t belong, not about the specific vaccination.
Which brings us back to the question of how people form opinions if they don’t use facts? I am considered a “conservative” writer. Apparently some think that this means I must oppose the HPV vaccine on moral grounds.
So when I corrected a reader by noting the HPV vaccine did not protect against all cancers, I was accused of belittling the vaccination. In fact the warning came from the pro-vaccine Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Web site, and is important because otherwise people who get the vaccine might skip tests thinking they are protected from all cervical cancer.
I know some assume I hold certain opinions because I am a “conservative.” But that’s backwards. I am a conservative because of my opinions, based on my (imperfect) view of the facts. I found a philosophy that works, that embodies the principles this country was founded on and that leads to solutions that work. It happens to be the “conservative” view.
It would make no sense to believe something that does not work and that is unsupported by facts. I don’t think most people would embrace such a philosophy. It’s why I write this column — because I believe if I present a sound argument for my position, people will listen. Not because they share my philosophy, but because they too want their opinions based on facts.
Charles Reichley has been a Prince William County resident since 1981. He can be reached at {encode="critically " title=" critically "}.
Advertisement
View More:
No tags are associated with this article
Not what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
Advertisement