Facts don’t speak for themselves.

Whenever anyone says they are “fact-checking” something, don’t believe it’s automatically an impartial truth test.

It’s typically just another way of advancing a particular perspective, or a way of avoiding the complicated nuances behind the topic at hand.

I think our modern, technical age encourages us to be too precise–too binary–in how we think about the world. We’re encouraged, I think, to pretend we have all the answers, and to never stop at “it’s complicated.”

But the fact is, some things are complicated. And some “facts” are, indeed, disputable.

Having a clean, black-and-white way to understand the world is appealing, but it’s the furthest thing from reality. And frankly, those who purport some super-simple framework for putting everything in perspective are often less sure of themselves than they’d have you believe.

Mostly, what matters is the general framework you use to think about the world. Not the “facts” that you think support your positions.

Because who’s to say what facts matter the most?

That’s the real question. And there’s no easy answer.