Fact Vs Fiction Quotes

Non-fiction can distort; facts can be realigned. But fiction never lies.

You frequently state, and in your letter you imply, that I have developed a completely one-sided outlook and look at everything in terms of science. Obviously my method of thought and reasoning is influenced by a scientific training – if that were not so my scientific training will have been a waste and a failure. But you look at science (or at least talk of it) as some sort of demoralizing invention of man, something apart from real life, and which must be cautiously guarded and kept separate from everyday existence. But science and everyday life cannot and should not be separated. Science, for me, gives a partial explanation of life. In so far as it goes, it is based on fact, experience and experiment. Your theories are those which you and many other people find easiest and pleasantest to believe, but so far as I can see, they have no foundation other than they leaf to a pleasanter view of life (and an exaggerated idea of our own importance)... I agree that faith is essential to success in life (success of any sort) but I do not accept your definition of faith, i.e. belief in life after death. In my view, all that is necessary for faith is the belief that by doing our best we shall come nearer to success and that success in our aims (the improvement of the lot of mankind, present and future) is worth attaining. Anyone able to believe in all that religion implies obviously must have such faith, but I maintain that faith in this world is perfectly possible without faith in another world… It has just occurred to me that you may raise the question of the creator. A creator of what? ... I see no reason to believe that a creator of protoplasm or primeval matter, if such there be, has any reason to be interested in our significant race in a tiny corner of the universe, and still less in us, as still more significant individuals. Again, I see no reason why the belief that we are insignificant or fortuitous should lessen our faith – as I have defined it.

I can remember we were happy, I say. Happy to have our own house. ‘Can you recall anything specific, like a detail, or is it more a feeling you remember?’ Anybody can remember details if you ask them to, I say, but it doesn’t mean it actually happened that way. I wait for him to make eye contact, which he does. ‘You have a point, Junior,’ he says.’ You’re right.

Before accepting your guess just based on how you feel, let's admit we just don't know, and discover if it's real.

Why do I write fact-based fiction? With secrecy so inscrutable, I'm looking to needle someone about someone or something.

adage that fact is stranger than fiction seems to be especially true for the workings of the brain.

In Italian papers, rumor often takes the place of fact. Unconfirmed and overblown stories are often printed as fact - one trick is the frequent use of the conditional verb tense which translates into English as “is said to”...

Hahaha! You fools really thought you were gonna walk in here and I would show myself like that. No, you’re mistaken. I have a few more tricks up my sleeve. You have a long road until you get to me and like I said, Mr. Angel, I’m the last person you’ll want to see! In fact, if you’re playing attention, you have met me already! However, I’ll leave it to my minions to take care of all of you! - Evil One from Revenge of the Gloobas

Institutions in science exist primarily, not to confirm a pre-existing idea, but to disprove such idea - and if they fail to do so, despite repeated attempts, then said idea is accepted as a scientific fact, whereas in religion, institutions exist primarily to preserve and endorse preexisting ideas, always discouraging scrutiny of any sort. Thus harmful and often inhuman flaws of our medieval past continue to dominate the domain of religion, while science continues to flourish by eliminating its flaws and unfolding new horizons of understanding. However, there is also reason for hope, for amidst the sea of medieval bigots dominating the domain of religion, there are also priests and preachers who are bringing in a whiff of fresh air. You see, no field of society is reformed on its own. It is reformed by the actions of people involved in it. So if there is to be reform in religion, the practitioners of religion - priests, preachers, nuns, monks and every such individual, must come forward, before everyone else, and set an example as advocates of harmony and growth.

Institutions in science exist primarily, not to confirm a pre-existing idea, but to disprove such idea - and if they fail to do so, despite repeated attempts, then said idea is accepted as a scientific fact, whereas in religion, institutions exist primarily to preserve and endorse pre-existing ideas, always discouraging scrutiny of any sort. Thus harmful and often inhuman flaws of our medieval past continue to dominate the domain of religion, while science continues to flourish by eliminating its flaws and unfolding new horizons of understanding.