Originally Posted by ubertuber

I think we're drowning in facts - there are far more of them than any of us could reasonably hope to survey and construct a balanced point of view. In particular, the internet has brought so much information to our fingertips that you can find facts or other documentation to support nearly any contention.

Because of this, any particular presentation of facts must be an expression of a point of view. This presentation is constructed by the places the author looks for their facts, by which facts are included and which aren't and by the relative emphasis placed on them.

Interestingly, this was the basis for the argument John Roberts used against international law as precedent in the U.S. He pointed out that if you assemble a large enough group of people, it becomes easy to pick your friends out. Similarly, a judge with the whole of international law to survey can easily find cases to support any ruling.

I'm not saying that I discount facts entirely, but that I recognize how plentiful they are. Consequently, I'm more interested in the way a person strings them together - which could alternately be called analysis or perspective.

I also prefer discussion over debate, the difference in my mind being whether one seeks to propagate their own views, or learn from those of others.