there is no such thing as a “bare uninterpreted fact”. “Just the facts” is not a realizable ideal.
That is, nobody’s beliefs are facts. But they can be more or less factlike. I don’t see any sensible point of disagreement (with the article) in your response. “Two people can disagree! That means that nobody has facts.” The OP didn’t claim what you’re implying they claimed.
(What I mean is—this is the sort of response I’d expect from somebody who read the title but not the article.)
You don’t seem to be engaging with the post well.
That is, nobody’s beliefs are facts. But they can be more or less factlike. I don’t see any sensible point of disagreement (with the article) in your response. “Two people can disagree! That means that nobody has facts.” The OP didn’t claim what you’re implying they claimed.
(What I mean is—this is the sort of response I’d expect from somebody who read the title but not the article.)