softwaretestingbreak.com

If you say : the sun comes up tomorrow. Are you doing an assumption? If you say: I think the sun comes up tomorrow. Are you doing an assumption?

ChatGPT answered:

Yes — but there’s a subtle difference in how the two are framed. Let’s break it down carefully.

“The sun comes up tomorrow.”

This is stated as a fact, not as a personal opinion.

Philosophically, it’s still technically an assumption because you’re assuming that the future will behave like the past (the sun has risen every day before). David Hume called this “inductive reasoning”: you assume the future will resemble the past.

So even though it feels like a certainty, it rests on an assumption about the consistency of nature.

“I think the sun comes up tomorrow.”

This explicitly frames it as your belief or opinion, not a guaranteed fact.

It still relies on the same underlying assumption (that the sun will behave consistently), but now you’re acknowledging it’s your personal judgment rather than asserting it as absolute truth.

Summary: Both involve an assumption about the future, but the first presents it as a fact, while the second frames it as your belief. The difference is in assertion vs. acknowledgment of uncertainty.


Continued:

let’s dig deeper into how “thinking” vs. “stating” shifts the role of assumptions.

1. When you state → “The sun comes up tomorrow.”

You are asserting something as a fact.

People hearing it will usually treat it as truth, unless they challenge you.

The assumption (that tomorrow will resemble today) is hidden — you’re not drawing attention to it.

Philosophers would say: you’re relying on an implicit assumption.

Everyday effect: You sound confident. If you’re wrong, it feels like you misled others.

2. When you think → “I think the sun comes up tomorrow.”

You are signaling awareness of uncertainty.

Listeners recognize that it’s based on your belief or judgment, not an absolute claim.

The assumption (that tomorrow resembles today) is explicitly acknowledged — because you’re admitting it’s just your thought.

Everyday effect: You sound humble or open to correction. If you’re wrong, people see it as a misprediction, not a false claim.

3. Why this matters

Language hides or exposes assumptions.

Saying “X will happen” conceals the assumption.

Saying “I think X will happen” shines a light on the assumption.

This is why in science, philosophy, or even law, people often phrase things carefully (“evidence suggests…” vs. “this is”). It shows how much certainty they’re claiming.

So in short:

Stating = presenting assumption as fact.

Thinking = showing assumption as assumption.



Alright, now we’re in the juicy part — how this subtle difference plays out in debates, relationships, and everyday talk.

In Debates

Stating:

“This policy will make the economy stronger.”

Comes off as authoritative. People who disagree feel they must disprove you.

If your assumption is shaky, it risks looking arrogant.

Thinking:

“I think this policy will make the economy stronger.”

Opens the door for discussion. You’re owning that it’s your reasoning, not universal truth.

Disagreement feels safer: “I see why you think that, but I think differently.”

Tip: Good debaters often mix the two — state facts with authority, but soften predictions with “I think” or “evidence suggests.”

In Relationships

Stating:

“You never listen to me.”

Sounds like a fact → triggers defensiveness (“That’s not true!”).

Thinking:

“I feel like you don’t listen to me sometimes.”

Shows it’s your perception, not an objective fact.

Partner is more likely to engage without fighting: “Oh, when do you feel that way?”

In love, “I think / I feel” = softens assumptions and avoids unnecessary wars.

In Everyday Life

Stating:

“It’s going to rain tomorrow.”

If you’re wrong, people tease you (“Ha! You were wrong”).

Thinking:

“I think it might rain tomorrow.”

Wrong? Nobody cares — it was just your assumption.

This is why forecasters and scientists phrase things probabilistically: it protects credibility.

Golden takeaway:

Statements = power, authority, and risk.

“I think” = humility, openness, and flexibility.

The magic is knowing when to use which.

In leadership, too much “I think” makes you sound weak.

In intimacy or collaboration, too much stating makes you sound rigid.

I continued:

There are other aspects Sometimes I use the : I think But then people say : you're doing an assumption What can be reasons for them to do that? What is a good way to correct them: There is personal judgement involved here!"

Yes you spotted something very subtle: even when you use “I think”, some people may still label it an assumption. Let’s unpack why that happens — and how you can respond with clarity.

Why people might still say “That’s an assumption”

They collapse “assumption” and “judgment” into the same thing.

For some, anything that isn’t proven = an assumption.

So even if you phrase it as “I think…”, they hear: “You’re assuming without certainty.”

They’re challenging your reasoning.

Sometimes “That’s an assumption” really means: “You haven’t shown me evidence.”

Example: You say “I think the company will succeed.” → They shoot back “That’s an assumption.” (They want proof, not just your thought.)

They want to shift the power balance.

Calling your judgment an “assumption” can be a way of undermining it — making it sound weaker, less credible.

It’s almost rhetorical: instead of debating your point, they reduce it to “just an assumption.”

How you can respond

The trick is to differentiate judgment from blind assumption without sounding defensive.

Option 1: Clarify scope

“It’s not a blind assumption — it’s my judgment based on what I’ve seen so far.”

Option 2: Reframe

“True, it’s not proven. But it’s more of a personal judgment than an assumption pulled out of thin air.”

Option 3: Anchor it

“Yes, it’s an assumption — but it’s a reasoned one, not a random guess.”

Option 4: Light & firm correction

“Not just an assumption — there’s personal judgment involved here.”

(Exactly like you suggested . That phrasing works beautifully if you deliver it calmly.)

Golden formula

If you want to keep credibility and avoid unnecessary battles:

“It’s not a raw assumption — it’s a considered judgment. If you want, I can explain my reasoning.”

That both:

protects your authority, and

invites dialogue instead of conflict.