emotions are often believed to get in the way of reason's proper workings

[keannu]

The answer in the blank is "In fact", but I chose "neverthless" in some question. I don't think "neverthless" works here, but when do we have to use "in fact'"? In which cases?

ex)To better understand the interrelations of music and emotions, it is first important to acknowledge that, at least in Western history, there has been a strong tendancy to regard emotions as different from, and of lesser value than, intellect. The belief has been widespread that reason, or rationality, is the epitome of human functioning, and that the emotions or feelings have little or nothing to do with reason. ______, emotions are often believed to get in the way of reason's proper workings.....

 

[Raymott]

The answer in the blank is "In fact", but I chose "neverthless" in some question. I don't think "neverthless" works here, but when do we have to use "in fact'"? In which cases?

ex)To better understand the interrelations of music and emotions, it is first important to acknowledge that, at least in Western history, there has been a strong tendancy to regard emotions as different from, and of lesser value than, intellect. The belief has been widespread that reason, or rationality, is the epitome of human functioning, and that the emotions or feelings have little or nothing to do with reason. ______, emotions are often believed to get in the way of reason's proper workings.....

"In fact" is used to present what is factual, after an opinion is given. But it can 'mean' opposite things, as follows:
1. "Reason has been held as the epitome of human functioning. In fact, emotions get in the way."
2. "Reason has been held as the epitome of human functioning. In fact, emotions are more important than previously realised."
So, the "in fact" clause supports the opinion in 1. but denies/negates it in 2.

Either way, it's used to stress what the author is asserting to be fact, as opposed to what he has presented as opinion.

 

[keannu]

"In fact" is used to present what is factual, after an opinion is given. But it can 'mean' opposite things, as follows:
1. "Reason has been held as the epitome of human functioning. In fact, emotions get in the way."
2. "Reason has been held as the epitome of human functioning. In fact, emotions are more important than previously realised."
So, the "in fact" clause supports the opinion in 1. but denies/negates it in 2.

Either way, it's used to stress what the author is asserting to be fact, as opposed to what he has presented as opinion.

But this "emotions are often believed to get in the way of reason's proper workings....." seems also an opinion because of "believed" in the middle. So I mean both the former and the latter seem to be opinions not opinion+fact. The dictionary's definition of "in fact" is "to be used to add some more thing to previously said sentences."
"Nevetheless" also seems to be used to contradict the previous sentence, then why doesn't it work here?
Maybe I'm wrong, but I just want to be assured. You are the only one who can answer me because of our little time difference while others all asleep.:lol::lol::lol:

 

[Tdol]

It's not contradicting- the previous sentence says emotions have little to do with reason. The last sentence takes it a step further and suggests they can be a hindrance. I think it is here for emphasis and not to contradict.

 

[Raymott]

But this "emotions are often believed to get in the way of reason's proper workings....." seems also an opinion because of "believed" in the middle. So I mean both the former and the latter seem to be opinions not opinion+fact.
It depends on what the writer believes. Yes, this is still an opinion, but the writer obviously takes the position that he is right.
1. "It used to be believed that the earth was flat. In fact, it is round." That is an example of its use to introduce a contradiction.
2. "It used to be believed that the earth was flat. In fact, they thought that sailors would fall off the edge if they went to far." That is an example of a supportive statement.

The dictionary's definition of "in fact" is "to be used to add some more thing to previously said sentences."
That's a very non-specific "definition" and could define many words, such as "Furthermore, in addition, moreover, also ..." There's nothing in that "definition" that would make me think they mean "in fact". In fact, I wouldn't call it a definition.

"Nevetheless" also seems to be used to contradict the previous sentence, then why doesn't it work here?
"Nevertheless" doesn't work here because it doesn't introduce a contradiction. The original sentence functions as in sentence 1. of my previous post. Also, "nevertheless" doesn't generally introduce a contradiction. It introduces a sentence that is true "notwithstanding, or despite, or unrelated" to the truth value of the previous material.


Maybe I'm wrong, but I just want to be assured. You are the only one who can answer me because of our little time difference while others all asleep.:lol::lol::lol:

One can be in the same time zone and still not be logged on at the same time. Also, some people log in during the morning while others across the world are logged in at night. I log in at any time of the day or night that suits me.