Opinions

Use this philosophy forum to discuss and debate general philosophy topics that don't fit into one of the other categories.

This forum is NOT for factual, informational or scientific questions about philosophy (e.g. "What year was Socrates born?"). Those kind of questions can be asked in the off-topic section.
User avatar
chewybrian
Posts: 1594
Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
Location: Florida man

Opinions

Post by chewybrian »

What exactly are opinions, as opposed to knowledge, facts, or something else?

Do we have control over the formation of our opinions? To what extent do we choose what to believe, or simply perceive or deduce something which our reason then requires us to accept?

When is it right, rational, or wise to hold an opinion, and when should we withhold judgment?

Does a philosopher form opinions more carefully than others? Do you hold to the scientific method, or have some other higher standards than most folks might apply?

Could we improve things for ourselves or others by being more careful about the way we form opinions, or how often we have an opinion instead of making no finding?
"If determinism holds, then past events have conspired to cause me to hold this view--it is out of my control. Either I am right about free will, or it is not my fault that I am wrong."
User avatar
Pantagruel
Posts: 202
Joined: July 2nd, 2019, 5:26 pm
Favorite Philosopher: George Herbert Mead

Re: Opinions

Post by Pantagruel »

1. Knowledge is usually viewed as a special kind of belief/opinion - viz. Knowledge is a true belief supported by sufficient evidence.
2. Much of our cognitive experience is indeed pre-formatted by so-called "cognitive biases" which tend to skew our perceptions from veridicality. I'd suggest you google "cognitive biases" and acquaint yourself with them, they are many.
3. Descartes is the original champion of "systematic doubt". Definitely worth looking at his Discourse on Method as a jumping off point.
4. Ironically, technical specialists can become more fixed in their views rather than less, even going so far as to falsify research in some cases. Go figure. Difference between 'espoused' and 'enacted' values. Walk the walk.
5. Yes, I think we should all be much more attentive to everything we say and do. Excavate our true motivations for acting.

Great set of quetsions!
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7935
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Opinions

Post by LuckyR »

chewybrian wrote: September 18th, 2019, 4:39 pm What exactly are opinions, as opposed to knowledge, facts, or something else?

Do we have control over the formation of our opinions? To what extent do we choose what to believe, or simply perceive or deduce something which our reason then requires us to accept?

When is it right, rational, or wise to hold an opinion, and when should we withhold judgment?

Does a philosopher form opinions more carefully than others? Do you hold to the scientific method, or have some other higher standards than most folks might apply?

Could we improve things for ourselves or others by being more careful about the way we form opinions, or how often we have an opinion instead of making no finding?
What distinguishes the difference does not stem from your intent, rather the subject matter being discussed.

For example: If I am measuring the length of two lines with a ruler, it is a "fact" that one is longer than another. If I state that I "know" that one is longer than another by eyeballing them from across the room, I am subject to common optical illusions where the opposite of my optical evaluation may end up being the "fact". Lastly if I determine that chocolate ice cream tastes better than vanilla, while a "fact" for me personally at this moment in time, is overall merely my "opinion" as pertains to an audience hearing my declaration.
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
chewybrian
Posts: 1594
Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
Location: Florida man

Re: Opinions

Post by chewybrian »

Pantagruel wrote: September 19th, 2019, 8:18 am 1. Knowledge is usually viewed as a special kind of belief/opinion - viz. Knowledge is a true belief supported by sufficient evidence.
You are right, of course, but maybe I should have asked this question differently. Perhaps the real question is when and why do we decide to treat opinions as facts, instead of being aware that they are simply opinions. A lot of people certainly treat opinion as fact, and that starts all sorts of trouble. I'm not sure what it is that gets people to think they know what they can not know.
Pantagruel wrote: September 19th, 2019, 8:18 am 2. Much of our cognitive experience is indeed pre-formatted by so-called "cognitive biases" which tend to skew our perceptions from veridicality. I'd suggest you google "cognitive biases" and acquaint yourself with them, they are many.
These seem to come in large part through evolution. In the wild, it was a benefit to be able to form quick impressions and act on them. There was no time for contemplation in life or death circumstances. So, it makes sense that we are wired to be opinionated. The remainder perhaps comes from laziness, as it is easier to make snap judgments and free our mind to go back to whatever else we prefer to focus on. It is also tempting to lean toward judgments that fit our chosen view of the world, to avoid admitting we might be wrong, or to have to shake the foundations of our understanding of the world.
Pantagruel wrote: September 19th, 2019, 8:18 am 3. Descartes is the original champion of "systematic doubt". Definitely worth looking at his Discourse on Method as a jumping off point.
If I can doubt whether I experience reality or imagine it as a head in a jar, then I can doubt anything. It is a good reminder, but I don't know that people need to take things that far. I think most of us hold opinions that have little backing, that don't need a system to create doubt. We could learn more and have better interactions with others if we held off making such judgments.
Pantagruel wrote: September 19th, 2019, 8:18 am
4. Ironically, technical specialists can become more fixed in their views rather than less, even going so far as to falsify research in some cases. Go figure. Difference between 'espoused' and 'enacted' values. Walk the walk.
So, asking the expert can backfire; this is not comforting.
Pantagruel wrote: September 19th, 2019, 8:18 am 5. Yes, I think we should all be much more attentive to everything we say and do. Excavate our true motivations for acting.
Agreed. This is my real reason for asking these questions. In particular, I think we make trouble for ourselves by forming opinions about people. Most of us are closer to the mark in our assessments of the physical world. Sartre said "hell is other people", and opinions are at the root of the problem. We look at people as objects in a sense. We try to define and categorize them in the same way, when they are something very different. They never fully reveal themselves, and they are always subject to change. Instead of thinking "Jamie is a jerk", we should limit our thoughts to "Jamie did something I did not like today". Instead, we categorize people in all sorts of ways, good or bad, that never really fit, and don't allow that person to grow and change.

Stoic philosophy has taught me that, in large measure, your opinion becomes your reality. Note how two people can have a very different experience through identical circumstances and events. This is due to the baggage they brought with them. Keeping this in mind, it makes sense to work at forming your opinions into the ones that benefit you best. Form a grateful disposition, and you can see the good in most situations, and begin to have more positive experiences, even if the world around you stays pretty much the same.

The quickest shortcut on the path to trying to become a stoic is to withhold judgment as often as possible. In particular, this applies to other people. If you don't judge them to be good or bad people, then you won't try to categorize their actions to fit your judgments of them. Once you've judged them badly, then you will tend to attach bad motives to their actions, and then you will see injustice at every turn, and often be angry or resentful. Instead, if you make no finding, you can take new actions at face value, or even give them the benefit of the doubt. You will be happier without the burden of feeling injustice, and in time you may find out this person, whom you might have initially decided was evil, is OK after all. You will both experience and cause less hell if you make fewer judgments about others.
"If determinism holds, then past events have conspired to cause me to hold this view--it is out of my control. Either I am right about free will, or it is not my fault that I am wrong."
User avatar
chewybrian
Posts: 1594
Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
Location: Florida man

Re: Opinions

Post by chewybrian »

LuckyR wrote: September 19th, 2019, 8:51 pm What distinguishes the difference does not stem from your intent, rather the subject matter being discussed.

For example: If I am measuring the length of two lines with a ruler, it is a "fact" that one is longer than another. If I state that I "know" that one is longer than another by eyeballing them from across the room, I am subject to common optical illusions where the opposite of my optical evaluation may end up being the "fact". Lastly if I determine that chocolate ice cream tastes better than vanilla, while a "fact" for me personally at this moment in time, is overall merely my "opinion" as pertains to an audience hearing my declaration.
Strangely, you might say my choice of ice cream is one of the things I can declare with greatest certainty. It depends on nothing beyond my own personal experience, to which I have total access. You can almost say I can't be wrong. My opinion of which football team is better is grounded on my imperfect and woefully incomplete information about their true abilities, and I'm bound to be wrong sometimes.

In the case of the optical illusion, even though I was fooled, the appearance was effectively a fact to me. I would not judge primitive man harshly for believing the sun revolved around the earth. In fact, it would have seemed foolish to think otherwise at the time. I suppose I would separate judgments about the physical world from other opinions, and say that I am not much interested in the former in this case. We tend to mostly get it right when judging the physical world, and often get it wrong otherwise.
"If determinism holds, then past events have conspired to cause me to hold this view--it is out of my control. Either I am right about free will, or it is not my fault that I am wrong."
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7935
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Opinions

Post by LuckyR »

chewybrian wrote: September 21st, 2019, 6:10 am
LuckyR wrote: September 19th, 2019, 8:51 pm What distinguishes the difference does not stem from your intent, rather the subject matter being discussed.

For example: If I am measuring the length of two lines with a ruler, it is a "fact" that one is longer than another. If I state that I "know" that one is longer than another by eyeballing them from across the room, I am subject to common optical illusions where the opposite of my optical evaluation may end up being the "fact". Lastly if I determine that chocolate ice cream tastes better than vanilla, while a "fact" for me personally at this moment in time, is overall merely my "opinion" as pertains to an audience hearing my declaration.
Strangely, you might say my choice of ice cream is one of the things I can declare with greatest certainty. It depends on nothing beyond my own personal experience, to which I have total access. You can almost say I can't be wrong. My opinion of which football team is better is grounded on my imperfect and woefully incomplete information about their true abilities, and I'm bound to be wrong sometimes.

In the case of the optical illusion, even though I was fooled, the appearance was effectively a fact to me. I would not judge primitive man harshly for believing the sun revolved around the earth. In fact, it would have seemed foolish to think otherwise at the time. I suppose I would separate judgments about the physical world from other opinions, and say that I am not much interested in the former in this case. We tend to mostly get it right when judging the physical world, and often get it wrong otherwise.
Basically opinions are the equivalent of asking: "what number am I thinking of?" I am always right and no one can dispute it. Sounds impressive but is almost worthless to anyone else.
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
h_k_s
Posts: 1243
Joined: November 25th, 2018, 12:09 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle
Location: Rocky Mountains

Re: Opinions

Post by h_k_s »

chewybrian wrote: September 18th, 2019, 4:39 pm What exactly are opinions, as opposed to knowledge, facts, or something else?

Do we have control over the formation of our opinions? To what extent do we choose what to believe, or simply perceive or deduce something which our reason then requires us to accept?

When is it right, rational, or wise to hold an opinion, and when should we withhold judgment?

Does a philosopher form opinions more carefully than others? Do you hold to the scientific method, or have some other higher standards than most folks might apply?

Could we improve things for ourselves or others by being more careful about the way we form opinions, or how often we have an opinion instead of making no finding?
In military law, an opinion is simply a personal conclusion based on a body of discovered and reported facts.

Example:

Fact 1 - the ground, roads, grass, and trees and everything else outside are wet.

Fact 2 - there are drops of water everywhere.

Fact 3 - it is cloudy overhead.

Opinion - it rained.
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7091
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Opinions

Post by Sculptor1 »

h_k_s wrote: September 22nd, 2019, 3:37 pm
In military law, an opinion is simply a personal conclusion based on a body of discovered and reported facts.

Example:

Fact 1 - the ground, roads, grass, and trees and everything else outside are wet.

Fact 2 - there are drops of water everywhere.

Fact 3 - it is cloudy overhead.

Opinion - it rained.
Fine except for the grammar failure: "...everything else outside are wet." Should be IS wet.
User avatar
chewybrian
Posts: 1594
Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
Location: Florida man

Re: Opinions

Post by chewybrian »

h_k_s wrote: September 22nd, 2019, 3:37 pm In military law, an opinion is simply a personal conclusion based on a body of discovered and reported facts.

Example:

Fact 1 - the ground, roads, grass, and trees and everything else outside are wet.

Fact 2 - there are drops of water everywhere.

Fact 3 - it is cloudy overhead.

Opinion - it rained.
This may be considered an opinion in the specialized use of the word in a courtroom setting, perhaps. But, it seems to be the opposite of opinion, in the sense I am getting at. It is my opinion that dogs are better than cats, that motorcycles are better than cars, or that Jenny is nice and Al is a jerk. I can provide supporting evidence, but people are likely to come to different conclusions with different priorities, and it is difficult to say which priorities rule. In a specific case, maybe a dog is a better choice for sniffing out drugs or explosives. But, in more general circumstances, like which pet is better for a family, there is not one right answer.

In the case of deciding it rained, most people would come to the same conclusion when presented with the same evidence. This is more of an assessment or best guess. It is a conclusion that might hold up in court, where the judge is unlikely to make a finding that dogs are better than cats or that Al is a jerk.

This is what I was getting at when I said we are much better at judging the physical world than people. We could mostly agree that it rained based on the evidence, but disagree over the other issues. Yet, some people feel just as strongly, perhaps more strongly, about their judgments in the other cases than about the rain. My point is that they should have different standards for these cases, and generally should come to fewer conclusions about the issues beyond physical evidence. When we draw conclusions about the motives of others, for example, everyone suffers.
"If determinism holds, then past events have conspired to cause me to hold this view--it is out of my control. Either I am right about free will, or it is not my fault that I am wrong."
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Opinions

Post by Pattern-chaser »

chewybrian wrote: September 21st, 2019, 5:56 amPerhaps the real question is when and why do we decide to treat opinions as facts, instead of being aware that they are simply opinions. A lot of people certainly treat opinion as fact, and that starts all sorts of trouble.
Ah, right. 👍 I think the only problem with opinions is when they're misrepresented as facts, as you describe. I find that almost anything people think can have value, when honestly declared. So faith, for example, can be of value, but asserting articles of faith as facts can only lead to confusion and misunderstanding.

Why do we misrepresent our opinions as facts? On the face of it, it's ridiculous, and yet so many of us do it. I can only think it's an attempt to give our opinions greater weight, by attaching the authority of 'facts' to them?
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7935
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Opinions

Post by LuckyR »

Pattern-chaser wrote: September 24th, 2019, 7:03 am
chewybrian wrote: September 21st, 2019, 5:56 amPerhaps the real question is when and why do we decide to treat opinions as facts, instead of being aware that they are simply opinions. A lot of people certainly treat opinion as fact, and that starts all sorts of trouble.
Ah, right. 👍 I think the only problem with opinions is when they're misrepresented as facts, as you describe. I find that almost anything people think can have value, when honestly declared. So faith, for example, can be of value, but asserting articles of faith as facts can only lead to confusion and misunderstanding.

Why do we misrepresent our opinions as facts? On the face of it, it's ridiculous, and yet so many of us do it. I can only think it's an attempt to give our opinions greater weight, by attaching the authority of 'facts' to them?
But is the fault of the sender of opinions or the receiver for not knowing the difference?
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Opinions

Post by Pattern-chaser »

LuckyR wrote: September 24th, 2019, 7:57 pm But is [it] the fault of the sender of opinions or the receiver for not knowing the difference?
Only the sender can (falsely) claim their opinions to be facts. The receiver might misunderstand, I suppose, although it seems unlikely.

Don't you find "fault" to be a fairly useless concept? 🤔
User avatar
h_k_s
Posts: 1243
Joined: November 25th, 2018, 12:09 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle
Location: Rocky Mountains

Re: Opinions

Post by h_k_s »

chewybrian wrote: September 23rd, 2019, 8:39 am
h_k_s wrote: September 22nd, 2019, 3:37 pm In military law, an opinion is simply a personal conclusion based on a body of discovered and reported facts.

Example:

Fact 1 - the ground, roads, grass, and trees and everything else outside are wet.

Fact 2 - there are drops of water everywhere.

Fact 3 - it is cloudy overhead.

Opinion - it rained.
This may be considered an opinion in the specialized use of the word in a courtroom setting, perhaps. But, it seems to be the opposite of opinion, in the sense I am getting at. It is my opinion that dogs are better than cats, that motorcycles are better than cars, or that Jenny is nice and Al is a jerk. I can provide supporting evidence, but people are likely to come to different conclusions with different priorities, and it is difficult to say which priorities rule. In a specific case, maybe a dog is a better choice for sniffing out drugs or explosives. But, in more general circumstances, like which pet is better for a family, there is not one right answer.

In the case of deciding it rained, most people would come to the same conclusion when presented with the same evidence. This is more of an assessment or best guess. It is a conclusion that might hold up in court, where the judge is unlikely to make a finding that dogs are better than cats or that Al is a jerk.

This is what I was getting at when I said we are much better at judging the physical world than people. We could mostly agree that it rained based on the evidence, but disagree over the other issues. Yet, some people feel just as strongly, perhaps more strongly, about their judgments in the other cases than about the rain. My point is that they should have different standards for these cases, and generally should come to fewer conclusions about the issues beyond physical evidence. When we draw conclusions about the motives of others, for example, everyone suffers.
Great summary of the issue, chewybrian . I agree with you on all 4's (legal jargon, means completely agree).

I think people get sloppy in their word usage and confuse words like "tastes" and "conclusions" with "opinions."

Many of the opinions you have pointed out are simply tastes. And as Adam Smith pointed out in his book in 1775 "The Wealth Of Nations" everyone of us has different tastes.

So if I believe that a hamburger is better than a hotdog, that is a matter of taste, not opinion.
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7935
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Opinions

Post by LuckyR »

Pattern-chaser wrote: September 25th, 2019, 7:29 am
LuckyR wrote: September 24th, 2019, 7:57 pm But is [it] the fault of the sender of opinions or the receiver for not knowing the difference?
Only the sender can (falsely) claim their opinions to be facts. The receiver might misunderstand, I suppose, although it seems unlikely.

Don't you find "fault" to be a fairly useless concept? 🤔
Yes, but how much of what is attempted to be passed (falsely) as fact, is explicitly labelled as such? In my experience not a majority. Spin doctors are very adept at using the implicit context of "fact" to misrepresent their claims without using an explicit label of "fact".

IMO the receiver needs to be a better and more discriminatng consumer of information. My guess is you agree with me, or do you believe everything you read?

As to "fault", you can use "responsibility" instead if it makes you feel better.
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14995
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Opinions

Post by Sy Borg »

chewybrian wrote: September 23rd, 2019, 8:39 amIn the case of deciding it rained, most people would come to the same conclusion when presented with the same evidence. This is more of an assessment or best guess. It is a conclusion that might hold up in court, where the judge is unlikely to make a finding that dogs are better than cats or that Al is a jerk.

This is what I was getting at when I said we are much better at judging the physical world than people. We could mostly agree that it rained based on the evidence, but disagree over the other issues.
Perhaps a category error? Judging whether it rained is akin to judging whether a person ate the last biscuit. There you check the evidence - an empty packet and perhaps signs of guilty. As you said, it's more an assessment than an opinion.

Whereas the equivalent to "Al is a jerk" would be claiming rain sucks (and gardeners will disagree). Here the opinion is qualitative rather than blandly declarative.
Post Reply

Return to “General Philosophy”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021