I really dislike how shaky of a grip developers seem to have on the distinction between 'truth' and 'opinion', and how little care they often take to distinguish between the two in how they communicate.
You can measure objective truth for something with clear, exhaustive parameters and outcomes. You can't do so for something that's based in personal beliefs or limited perspective! And likewise, when there *is* an objective truth, it's not a matter of opinion either.
It's not a surprise that misinformation spreads so readily in software development circles, if you look at how eg. a lot of new programmers are constantly faced with 'senior developers' framing their personal preferences and conclusions as the ultimate and only truth.
Basically, learn to say "I don't know" or "the best solution I've been able to find...".
For a concrete example:
"Static typing will catch some subset of type errors at compile/build time" can be an objective truth; it is measurable and/or provable exhaustively within clear parameters.
"Static typing makes software more reliable" is an opinion. There are many factors that go into reliability, not all of which you may be personally aware of, and some of which may be mutually exclusive with static typing.
"Static typing makes programming easier because you see errors faster" is an opinion. There are different ways to get that kind of advantage, some of which may again be unknown to you and at odds with static typing.
And you may feel very strongly about those opinions, and you may well be able to cherrypick twenty different studies that seem to confirm it, but it is still just an opinion! You would need to have exhaustively evaluated every possible approach that could theoretically exist to consider it an *objective fact*, and nobody on this earth has done so (or likely will ever do so).
