Fact in the context of Data (information)


Fact in the context of Data (information)

Fact Study page number 1 of 4

Play TriviaQuestions Online!

or

Skip to study material about Fact in the context of "Data (information)"


⭐ Core Definition: Fact

A fact is a true datum about one or more aspects of a circumstance. Standard reference works are often used to check facts. Scientific facts are verified by repeatable careful observation or measurement by experiments or other means. Generally speaking, facts are independent of belief, knowledge and opinion. Facts are different from inferences, theories, values, and objects.

For example, "This sentence contains words." accurately describes a linguistic fact, and "the Sun is a star" describes an astronomical fact. Further, "Abraham Lincoln was the 16th president of the United States" and "Abraham Lincoln was assassinated" are both historical facts.

↓ Menu
HINT:

In this Dossier

Fact in the context of Fiction

Fiction is any creative work, chiefly any narrative work, portraying individuals, events, or places that are imaginary or in ways that are imaginary. Fictional portrayals are thus inconsistent with fact, history, or plausibility. In a traditional narrow sense, fiction refers to written narratives in prose – often specifically novels, novellas, and short stories. More broadly, however, fiction encompasses imaginary narratives expressed in any medium, including not just writings but also live theatrical performances, films, television programs, radio dramas, comics, role-playing games, and video games.

View the full Wikipedia page for Fiction
↑ Return to Menu

Fact in the context of Truth

Truth or verity is the property of being in accord with fact or reality. In everyday language, it is typically ascribed to things that aim to represent reality or otherwise correspond to it, such as beliefs, propositions, and declarative sentences.

True statements are usually held to be the opposite of false statements. The concept of truth is discussed and debated in various contexts, including philosophy, art, theology, law, and science. Most human activities depend upon the concept, where its nature as a concept is assumed rather than being a subject of discussion, including journalism and everyday life. Some philosophers view the concept of truth as basic, and unable to be explained in any terms that are more easily understood than the concept of truth itself. Most commonly, truth is viewed as the correspondence of language or thought to a mind-independent world. This is called the correspondence theory of truth.

View the full Wikipedia page for Truth
↑ Return to Menu

Fact in the context of Critical thinking

Critical thinking is the process of analyzing available facts, evidence, observations, and arguments to make sound conclusions or informed choices. It involves recognizing underlying assumptions, providing justifications for ideas and actions, evaluating these justifications through comparisons with varying perspectives, and assessing their rationality and potential consequences. The goal of critical thinking is to form a judgment through the application of rational, skeptical, and unbiased analyses and evaluation. In modern times, the use of the phrase critical thinking can be traced to John Dewey, who used the phrase reflective thinking, which depends on the knowledge base of an individual; the excellence of critical thinking in which an individual can engage varies according to it. According to philosopher Richard W. Paul, critical thinking and analysis are competencies that can be learned or trained. The application of critical thinking includes self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective habits of the mind, as critical thinking is not a natural process; it must be induced, and ownership of the process must be taken for successful questioning and reasoning. Critical thinking presupposes a rigorous commitment to overcome egocentrism and sociocentrism, that leads to a mindful command of effective communication and problem solving.

View the full Wikipedia page for Critical thinking
↑ Return to Menu

Fact in the context of Meaning of life

The meaning of life is the concept of an individual's life, human life, or existence in general having an inherent significance or a philosophical point. There is no consensus on the specifics of such a concept, or whether the concept itself even exists in any objective sense. Thinking and discourse on the topic is sought in the English language through questions such as—but not limited to—"What is the meaning of life?", "What is the purpose of existence?", and "Why are we here?". There have been many proposed answers to these questions from many different cultural and ideological backgrounds. The search for life's meaning has produced much philosophical, scientific, theological, and metaphysical speculation throughout history. Different people and cultures believe different things for the answer to this question. Opinions vary on the usefulness of using time and resources in the pursuit of an answer. Excessive pondering can be indicative of, or lead to, an existential crisis.

The meaning of life can be derived from philosophical and religious contemplation of, and scientific inquiries about, existence, social ties, consciousness, and happiness. Many other issues are also involved, such as symbolic meaning, ontology, value, purpose, ethics, good and evil, free will, the existence of one or multiple gods, conceptions of God, the soul, and the afterlife. Scientific contributions focus primarily on describing related empirical facts about the universe, exploring the context and parameters concerning the "how" of life. Science also studies and can provide recommendations for the pursuit of well-being and a related conception of morality. An alternative, humanistic approach poses the question, "What is the meaning of my life?"

View the full Wikipedia page for Meaning of life
↑ Return to Menu

Fact in the context of Correspondence theory of truth

In metaphysics and philosophy of language, the correspondence theory of truth states that the truth or falsity of a statement is determined only by how it relates to the world and whether it accurately describes (i.e., corresponds with) that world.

Correspondence theories claim that true beliefs and true statements correspond to the actual state of affairs. This type of theory attempts to posit a relationship between thoughts or statements on one hand, and things or facts on the other.

View the full Wikipedia page for Correspondence theory of truth
↑ Return to Menu

Fact in the context of Verificationism

Verificationism, also known as the verification principle or the verifiability criterion of meaning, is a doctrine in philosophy and the philosophy of language which holds that a declarative sentence is cognitively meaningful only if it is either analytic or tautological (true or false in virtue of its logical form and definitions) or at least in principle verifiable by experience. On this view, many traditional statements of metaphysics, theology, and some of ethics and aesthetics are said to lack truth value or factual content, even though they may still function as expressions of emotions or attitudes rather than as genuine assertions. Verificationism was typically formulated as an empiricist criterion of cognitive significance: a proposed test for distinguishing meaningful, truth-apt sentences from "nonsense".

As a self-conscious movement, verificationism was a central thesis of logical positivism (or logical empiricism), developed in the 1920s and 1930s by members of the Vienna Circle and their allies in early analytic philosophy. Drawing on earlier empiricism and positivism (especially David Hume, Auguste Comte and Ernst Mach), on pragmatism (notably C. S. Peirce and William James), and on the logical and semantic innovations of Gottlob Frege and the early Wittgenstein, these philosophers sought a "scientific" conception of philosophy in which meaningful discourse would either consist in empirical claims ultimately testable by observation or in analytic truths of logic and mathematics. The verification principle was intended to explain why many traditional metaphysical disputes seemed irresolvable, to demarcate science from pseudo-science and speculative metaphysics, and to vindicate the special status of the natural sciences by taking empirical testability as the paradigm of serious inquiry.

View the full Wikipedia page for Verificationism
↑ Return to Menu

Fact in the context of Truth (religious)

Religious views on truth vary both between and within religions. The most universal concept of religion that holds true in every case is the inseparable nature of truth and religious belief. Each religion sees itself as the only path to truth. Religious truth, therefore, is never relative, always absolute.

According to an online edition of Webster's Dictionary, the word Truth is most often used to mean being in accord with fact or reality, or fidelity to an original or standard.

View the full Wikipedia page for Truth (religious)
↑ Return to Menu

Fact in the context of Logical positivism

Logical positivism, also known as logical empiricism or neo-positivism, was a philosophical movement, in the empiricist tradition, that sought to formulate a scientific philosophy in which philosophical discourse would be, in the perception of its proponents, as authoritative and meaningful as empirical science.

Logical positivism's central thesis was the verification principle, also known as the "verifiability criterion of meaning", according to which a statement is cognitively meaningful only if it can be verified through empirical observation or if it is a tautology (true by virtue of its own meaning or its own logical form). The verifiability criterion thus rejected statements of metaphysics, theology, ethics and aesthetics as cognitively meaningless in terms of truth value or factual content. Despite its ambition to overhaul philosophy by mimicking the structure and process of empirical science, logical positivism became erroneously stereotyped as an agenda to regulate the scientific process and to place strict standards on it.

View the full Wikipedia page for Logical positivism
↑ Return to Menu

Fact in the context of Data

Data (/ˈdtə/ DAY-tə, US also /ˈdætə/ DAT) are a collection of discrete or continuous values that convey information, describing the quantity, quality, fact, statistics, other basic units of meaning, or simply sequences of symbols that may be further interpreted formally. A datum is an individual value in a collection of data. Data are usually organized into structures such as tables that provide additional context and meaning, and may themselves be used as data in larger structures. Data may be used as variables in a computational process. Data may represent abstract ideas or concrete measurements.Data are commonly used in scientific research, economics, and virtually every other form of human organizational activity. Examples of data sets include price indices (such as the consumer price index), unemployment rates, literacy rates, and census data. In this context, data represent the raw facts and figures from which useful information can be extracted.

Data are collected using techniques such as measurement, observation, query, or analysis, and are typically represented as numbers or characters that may be further processed. Field data are data that are collected in an uncontrolled, in-situ environment. Experimental data are data that are generated in the course of a controlled scientific experiment. Data are analyzed using techniques such as calculation, reasoning, discussion, presentation, visualization, or other forms of post-analysis. Prior to analysis, raw data (or unprocessed data) is typically cleaned: Outliers are removed, and obvious instrument or data entry errors are corrected.

View the full Wikipedia page for Data
↑ Return to Menu

Fact in the context of Oath

Traditionally, an oath (from Anglo-Saxon āþ, also a plight) is a statement of fact or a promise taken by a sacrality as a sign of verity. A common legal substitute for those who object to making sacred oaths is to give an affirmation instead. Nowadays, even when there is no notion of sanctity involved, certain promises said out loud in ceremonial or juridical purpose are referred to as oaths. "To swear" is a verb used to describe the taking of an oath; to make a solemn vow.

View the full Wikipedia page for Oath
↑ Return to Menu

Fact in the context of Cliché

A cliché (UK: /ˈklʃ/ or US: /klˈʃ/; French: [kliʃe]) is a saying, idea, or element of an artistic work that has become overused to the point of losing its original meaning, novelty, or figurative or artistic power, even to the point of now being bland or uninteresting. In phraseology, the term has taken on a more technical meaning, referring to an expression imposed by conventionalized linguistic usage.

The term, which is typically pejorative, is often used in modern culture for an action or idea that is expected or predictable, based on a prior event. Clichés may or may not be true. Some are stereotypes, but some are simply truisms and facts. Clichés often are employed for comedic effect, typically in fiction.

View the full Wikipedia page for Cliché
↑ Return to Menu

Fact in the context of Emotional appeal

Appeal to emotion or argumentum ad passiones (meaning the same in Latin) is an informal fallacy characterized by the manipulation of the recipient's emotions in order to win an argument, especially in the absence of factual evidence. This kind of appeal to emotion is irrelevant to or distracting from the facts of the argument (a so-called "red herring") and encompasses several logical fallacies, including appeal to consequences, appeal to fear, appeal to flattery, appeal to pity, appeal to ridicule, appeal to spite, and wishful thinking.

Appeal to emotion is an application of social psychology. It is only fallacious when the emotions that are elicited are irrelevant to evaluating the truth of the conclusion and serve to distract from rational consideration of relevant premises or information. For instance, if a student says "If I get a failing grade for this paper I will lose my scholarship. It's not plagiarized." the emotions elicited by the first statement are not relevant to establishing whether the paper was plagiarized.

View the full Wikipedia page for Emotional appeal
↑ Return to Menu

Fact in the context of Evidence (law)

The law of evidence, also known as the rules of evidence, encompasses the rules and legal principles that govern the proof of facts in a legal proceeding. These rules determine what evidence must or must not be considered by the trier of fact in reaching its decision. The trier of fact is a judge in bench trials, or the jury in any cases involving a jury. The law of evidence is also concerned with the quantum (amount), quality, and type of proof needed to prevail in litigation. The rules vary depending upon whether the venue is a criminal court, civil court, or family court, and they vary by jurisdiction.

The quantum of evidence is the amount of evidence needed; the quality of proof is how reliable such evidence should be considered. Important rules that govern admissibility concern hearsay, authentication, relevance, privilege, witnesses, opinions, expert testimony, identification and rules of physical evidence. There are various standards of evidence, standards showing how strong the evidence must be to meet the legal burden of proof in a given situation, ranging from reasonable suspicion to preponderance of the evidence, clear and convincing evidence, or beyond a reasonable doubt.

View the full Wikipedia page for Evidence (law)
↑ Return to Menu

Fact in the context of Trier of fact

In law, a trier of fact or finder of fact is a person or group who determines disputed issues of fact in a legal proceeding (usually a trial) and how relevant they are to deciding its outcome. To determine a fact is to decide, from the evidence presented, whether something existed or some event occurred.

The factfinder differs by the type of proceeding. In a jury trial, it is the jury; in a non-jury trial, the judge is both the factfinder and the trier of law. In administrative proceedings, the factfinder may be a hearing officer or a hearing body.

View the full Wikipedia page for Trier of fact
↑ Return to Menu

Fact in the context of Reason (argument)

In philosophy and argumentation, a reason is a consideration that counts in favor of a conclusion, action, attitude or fact, or that explains why something is so. Reasons typically answer a why? question and are often introduced by expressions such as because, since, as, in virtue of, or in order to. They are central to accounts of practical reason, epistemic justification, moral evaluation, and everyday explanation, and they figure prominently in law and deliberative discourse.

Philosophers commonly distinguish three roles for reasons. Normative (or justifying) reasons are considerations that count in favor of responding one way rather than another (e.g., that it is raining is a reason to take an umbrella). Motivating reasons are the considerations in light of which an agent acts—what the agent treats as counting in favor at the time, whether or not it in fact does. Explanatory reasons cite what explains an event or action; when agents are involved, these often refer to psychological states (for example, that someone believed they were late explains why they ran).

View the full Wikipedia page for Reason (argument)
↑ Return to Menu

Fact in the context of Expression (mathematics)

In mathematics, an expression is an arrangement of symbols following the context-dependent, syntactic conventions of mathematical notation. Symbols can denote numbers, variables, operations, and functions. Other symbols include punctuation marks and brackets, used for grouping where there is not a well-defined order of operations.

Expressions are commonly distinguished from formulas: expressions usually denote mathematical objects, whereas formulas are statements about mathematical objects. This is analogous to natural language, where a noun phrase refers to an object, and a whole sentence refers to a fact. For example, and are both expressions, while the inequality is a formula. However, formulas are often considered as expressions that can be evaluated to the Boolean values true or false.

View the full Wikipedia page for Expression (mathematics)
↑ Return to Menu

Fact in the context of Scientific consensus

Scientific consensus is the majority judgment and position by active, qualified experts in a specific scientific discipline to establish a conclusion or fact. Scientific consensus results from the self-correcting scientific process of peer review, replication of the event through the scientific method, scholarly debate, meta-analysis, and publication of high-quality review articles, monographs, or guidelines in reputable books and journals to establish facts and durable knowledge about the topic.

Reaching consensus requires significant scientific agreement among qualified experts, a process based on scientific substantiation of a claim that meets the burden of proof by proposing a possible cause-and-effect mechanism supported by the totality of evidence, leading to agreement among experts. In many countries, scientific consensus established on significant scientific agreement is the basis for regulatory approval of drugs to specify a health claim for the properties of the approved therapeutic agent.

View the full Wikipedia page for Scientific consensus
↑ Return to Menu