What is truth?

[SwimExpert]

Who's reality? Your reality? My reality?

We don't have separate realities. We may perceive thingsndofferently. One or more of us may perceive things more incorrectly but that doesn't change what happens in reality.

A stone falls off a roof and crushes a man. One guy thinks he saw the roofer push it off. Another sees that the roofer somewhere else on the roof and no where near the falling stone. And one thinks the man underneath avoided the stone unscathed


Reality was it was an accident no matter.how sinister the one man thinks it was. Reality is also that the man was killed no matter how much the third man wants him to be safe.

Reality/ truth is what it is.

God is also truth. There is a reason He called Himself I Am. Because truth just is.

"We don't have separate realities. We may perceive thingsndofferently. One or more of us may perceive things more incorrectly but that doesn't change what happens in reality."


One's perception IS one's reality and therefore, it is also one's "truth".

So, from your perspective, in reality, the world is upside down.

Sounds like an excuse to me.

.

IOW, that is YOUR reality, YOUR truth.

The immutable laws of physics and nature say otherwise, Luddly.

You are upside down.

.

Interesting premise. The laws of physics say that reality is affected by perception. There are certain quantum activity which change based on whether they are observed or not. Physics has shown us that some things are true only if they are perceived.

 

[SwimExpert]

Things as they are, things as they were, and things as they will be.

In other words, reality.

Who's reality? Your reality? My reality?

We don't have separate realities. We may perceive thingsndofferently. One or more of us may perceive things more incorrectly but that doesn't change what happens in reality.

A stone falls off a roof and crushes a man. One guy thinks he saw the roofer push it off. Another sees that the roofer somewhere else on the roof and no where near the falling stone. And one thinks the man underneath avoided the stone unscathed


Reality was it was an accident no matter.how sinister the one man thinks it was. Reality is also that the man was killed no matter how much the third man wants him to be safe.

Reality/ truth is what it is.

God is also truth. There is a reason He called Himself I Am. Because truth just is.

"We don't have separate realities. We may perceive thingsndofferently. One or more of us may perceive things more incorrectly but that doesn't change what happens in reality."


One's perception IS one's reality and therefore, it is also one's "truth".

One's perception is just their perception. It may or may not be accurate. Reality is not dependent upon perception. If it does, it is not real.

My perception is that Sandra Bullock is beautiful. Is that true or not true?

 

[SwimExpert]

I believe that if there is a God who knows all things then he would be the source of all truth.

This is an interesting idea, but I'm afraid it ultimately fails. Your premise would require that the origin of truth be the knowledge of it. This creates question begging when referenced back to an omniscient being. It is true because God knows it. God knows it because it is true.

Now, if you were instead predicate truth on an omnipotent being, your premise would work better. It then becomes a matter of "it is true because God willed it."

 

[SwimExpert]

The reality for each is very different and therefore, so is their truth.

So, which is really the "truth"?

Perhaps all of them. Perhaps none of them. Better question: Is their reality the whole of all reality? Or is their reality circumscribed?

 

[SwimExpert]

Truth is not interpretable. It cannot change. It is fact. And fact cannot change.

What color is this text? Is your answer a fact? Is there any interpretation that occurs in determining the color of this text?

 

[SwimExpert]

Exactly. And that person's belief is that person's truth.

This is patently incorrect and is an amateur mistake. Belief is separate from truth. While it can be true that Suzy believes X, X does not become a truth in and of itself just because it is believed. I think part of your difficulty is that you allowed Avatar to rope you in with his false equivalency between truth and reality. There is no need for the two to be the same phenomenon, and indeed they are different. Reality is personal, truth is objective.

 

[SwimExpert]

Truth can only be gotten at by using the methods of science and math.

Can you prove that?

 

[SwimExpert]

Truth is objective, uncreated, and eternally-existent.

That is fatally untrue. For example: What is the position of the Earth? There is a true answer. However, it is continually changing. The universe is 4 dimensional, and as such truth cannot be eternal.

 

[percysunshine]

We don't have separate realities. We may perceive thingsndofferently. One or more of us may perceive things more incorrectly but that doesn't change what happens in reality.

A stone falls off a roof and crushes a man. One guy thinks he saw the roofer push it off. Another sees that the roofer somewhere else on the roof and no where near the falling stone. And one thinks the man underneath avoided the stone unscathed


Reality was it was an accident no matter.how sinister the one man thinks it was. Reality is also that the man was killed no matter how much the third man wants him to be safe.

Reality/ truth is what it is.

God is also truth. There is a reason He called Himself I Am. Because truth just is.

"We don't have separate realities. We may perceive thingsndofferently. One or more of us may perceive things more incorrectly but that doesn't change what happens in reality."


One's perception IS one's reality and therefore, it is also one's "truth".

So, from your perspective, in reality, the world is upside down.

Sounds like an excuse to me.

.

IOW, that is YOUR reality, YOUR truth.

The immutable laws of physics and nature say otherwise, Luddly.

You are upside down.

.

Interesting premise. The laws of physics say that reality is affected by perception. There are certain quantum activity which change based on whether they are observed or not. Physics has shown us that some things are true only if they are perceived.

Luddly is not a quantum object. At scales so small that measuring devices can no longer measure, it is debatable which things are real . However, we live in the macroscopic universe.

Nice try though..

 

[Capstone]

I certainly have not meant to imply that one's personal truth is in fact, real, provable, hold-in-the-hand-truth. ...

Then why call it what we don't know it is, namely "true" (or any variant of that word)?

You could avoid a lot of confusion in the future, simply by stating at the outset that your definition of "personal truths" encompasses personal falsehoods.

My objection here goes beyond wrangling over semantics, Ludds. I'd take no issue with your use of the phrase, "personal truths", if it were pre-qualified in a manner to account for the very real prospect that such personal convictions might not be remotely true. The adjective "personal" doesn't necessarily convy this. Something like "prospective truths" would far better fit the bill without violating the defining characteristic of "truth" in such cases.

...Our truths are indeed subjective and based on our perceptions.

If you mean our convictions (or the "prospective truths" in which we believe) are subjective and based largely on perception, then wholeheartedly agreed!

One thing I'll never agree to, though, is that something black can rightfully be characterized, in any literal sense, as "white"; which is to say that possible falsehoods have no business to be characterized as unqualified "personal truths".

...We can try to sympathize, empathize with other view points but, in the end, our "truth" is a product of a wide variety of forces.[. . .]That doesn't preclude striving for true facts but quite often, even indisputable facts don't sway our opinions.

While it's certainly true that our worldviews are shaped by a variety of forces, I suggest that the primary force is truth itself. This is true of all worldviews, no matter how closely aligned or widely divergent each one happens to be in relation to truth. In other words, in all cases, since the truth of 'objective reality' remains completely uneffected by our beliefs about it, it defines the parameters and provides a litmus test for all of those beliefs. It is the unchanging line by which all other lines are measured.

However, as I see things, nobody is justified in claiming that his or her convictions are "true" (as may be implied by the phrase "personal truth"), so long as those convictions are uncertain and thereby properly categorized as mere opinions/beliefs.

Now, I realize some would argue that 'certainty' is beyond the scope of human knowledge (to which my usual response is something like, "What makes you so sure about that?"" ), but there are a couple of classes of epistemological circumstances and principles that clearly suggest otherwise (as implied by your use of the phrase "indisputable facts", BTW).

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Truth is not interpretable. It cannot change. It is fact. And fact cannot change.

What color is this text? Is your answer a fact? Is there any interpretation that occurs in determining the color of this text?

My interpretation is that the color is red. So I believe it is red.
The truth is that the color is: (In subtractive color used in digital formats such as your screen)
R - 248
G - 221
B - 200
In Additive color, as converted by an Adobe engine is:
C - 2
M - 13
Y - 19
K - 0

Anything else?

 

[Capstone]

Truth is objective, uncreated, and eternally-existent.

That is fatally untrue. For example: What is the position of the Earth? There is a true answer. However, it is continually changing. The universe is 4 dimensional, and as such truth cannot be eternal.

I suggest that truth has forever held sway both within and without the temporal dimensions of objective reality. It is thusly temporal and simultaneously atemporal in various respects.

In my view, logic dictates that 'The Universe' (or the self-generative/self-perptuating whole) has always existed in some form or other (ex nihilo nihil fit)...and that it will always continue to do so. Yes, cyclical models of the cosmos are the only models that make any sense to me; but the 'cosmological constant', in my view, is truth itself, irrespective of the presence or absence of conscious awareness at any given point in time within those cycles.

Whatever's the case...is the case, irrespective of our ignorance as to what is, in fact, the case; and THAT is a statement of my personal knowledge of an objective truth.

 

[PratchettFan]

Things as they are, things as they were, and things as they will be.

In other words, reality.

Who's reality? Your reality? My reality?

We don't have separate realities. We may perceive thingsndofferently. One or more of us may perceive things more incorrectly but that doesn't change what happens in reality.

A stone falls off a roof and crushes a man. One guy thinks he saw the roofer push it off. Another sees that the roofer somewhere else on the roof and no where near the falling stone. And one thinks the man underneath avoided the stone unscathed


Reality was it was an accident no matter.how sinister the one man thinks it was. Reality is also that the man was killed no matter how much the third man wants him to be safe.

Reality/ truth is what it is.

God is also truth. There is a reason He called Himself I Am. Because truth just is.

"We don't have separate realities. We may perceive thingsndofferently. One or more of us may perceive things more incorrectly but that doesn't change what happens in reality."


One's perception IS one's reality and therefore, it is also one's "truth".

One's perception is just their perception. It may or may not be accurate. Reality is not dependent upon perception. If it does, it is not real.

My perception is that Sandra Bullock is beautiful. Is that true or not true?

Is it true that is your perception or is it true she is beautiful? As to the former, I would have no way of knowing and as to the latter, that is a subjective opinion.

 

[PratchettFan]

Truth is not interpretable. It cannot change. It is fact. And fact cannot change.

What color is this text? Is your answer a fact? Is there any interpretation that occurs in determining the color of this text?

My interpretation is that the color is red. So I believe it is red.
The truth is that the color is: (In subtractive color used in digital formats such as your screen)
R - 248
G - 221
B - 200
In Additive color, as converted by an Adobe engine is:
C - 2
M - 13
Y - 19
K - 0

Anything else?

You haven't defined "color". It is a meaningless term except for the observer. If you wish to deal in reality, then the question should be what are the wavelengths of the photons generated by those particular pixels on the screen.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Truth is not interpretable. It cannot change. It is fact. And fact cannot change.

What color is this text? Is your answer a fact? Is there any interpretation that occurs in determining the color of this text?

My interpretation is that the color is red. So I believe it is red.
The truth is that the color is: (In subtractive color used in digital formats such as your screen)
R - 248
G - 221
B - 200
In Additive color, as converted by an Adobe engine is:
C - 2
M - 13
Y - 19
K - 0

Anything else?

You haven't defined "color". It is a meaningless term except for the observer. If you wish to deal in reality, then the question should be what are the wavelengths of the photons generated by those particular pixels on the screen.

I did define color, specifically in fact.

 

[PratchettFan]

Truth is not interpretable. It cannot change. It is fact. And fact cannot change.

What color is this text? Is your answer a fact? Is there any interpretation that occurs in determining the color of this text?

My interpretation is that the color is red. So I believe it is red.
The truth is that the color is: (In subtractive color used in digital formats such as your screen)
R - 248
G - 221
B - 200
In Additive color, as converted by an Adobe engine is:
C - 2
M - 13
Y - 19
K - 0

Anything else?

You haven't defined "color". It is a meaningless term except for the observer. If you wish to deal in reality, then the question should be what are the wavelengths of the photons generated by those particular pixels on the screen.

I did define color, specifically in fact.

No, you didn't. You defined digital formats, not color.

 

[SwimExpert]

Truth is not interpretable. It cannot change. It is fact. And fact cannot change.

What color is this text? Is your answer a fact? Is there any interpretation that occurs in determining the color of this text?

My interpretation is that the color is red. So I believe it is red.
The truth is that the color is: (In subtractive color used in digital formats such as your screen)
R - 248
G - 221
B - 200
In Additive color, as converted by an Adobe engine is:
C - 2
M - 13
Y - 19
K - 0

Anything else?

So, is it red, yes or no? If your interpretation true, or is the color actually blue?

 

[danielpalos]

When Jesus stood before Pilate, Pilate asked Jesus, "What is truth?" The gospels do not give us Jesus' reply. So I present the question to you. In your opinion, what is truth?

Truth is that which is.

What about that which is not; may it not still be a truth?

 

[SwimExpert]

I suggest that truth has forever held sway both within and without the temporal dimensions of objective reality. It is thusly temporal and simultaneously atemporal in various respects.

You attribute temporal qualities to describe an alleged atemporal reality, which ultimately forces us to dismiss the suggested atemporal reality.

Whatever's the case...is the case, irrespective of our ignorance as to what is, in fact, the case; and THAT is a statement of my personal knowledge of an objective truth.

Personal knowledge of an objective truth is a contradiction. If it is personal knowledge, it is not objective truth.

 

[SwimExpert]

Is it true that is your perception or is it true she is beautiful?

Is the statement true?

Sandra Bullock is a beautiful woman.

Is that a true statement, or a false statement?