Heyo
Veteran Member
Neither. It is a convention, a thing the people who thought up human rights agreed upon and declared axiomatically true.Do you see that take on opinions as something you or anyone could find necessary and sufficient grounds for concluding it was true, or do you see that take more in the way of being a 'best guess' or 'reasonable assumption'?
I'm neither an Einstein, nor a constitutional lawyer but I think I understood the difference between an axiom and a derived law by the age of 13.But please don't tell me you're the Einstein of epistemology, unless you are. It would confirm for me my two ex-wife's independently arrived at, but common take on my ego.
Having said that, I think I know where you want to go. While opinions can be disconnect from any facts, they usually aren't. People arrive at an opinion because of informations they have. And if they have wrong informations they arrive at "wrong" opinions.
And the danger lies in the backwards thought that if I like the opinion a pundit has, the informations that drove that opinion must be true.