Author Topic: What is true?  (Read 16604 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

February 27, 2007, 08:22:15 AM
Reply #15

Steve

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 3685
  • Karma:
    139
    • View Profile
Truth is anything that is factual, as Tsumaru already said.

For example, if I say that I have a camera in my room then this is factual, and therefore true. Even though I provide no evidence, it is none-the-less true. Even if you don't believe me, it is true. Even if I hadn't said I have a camera in my room, it is true that I have a camera in my room simply by the virtue of there being a camera in my room. If I didn't have a camera in my room, then it would be untrue.

~Steve
« Last Edit: February 27, 2007, 08:26:23 AM by Steve »
Mastery does not occur when you've performed a feat once or twice. Instead, it comes after years of training, when you realize that you no longer notice when you're performing a feat which used to require so much effort. Even walking takes years of training for a human: why not everything else?

February 27, 2007, 10:16:20 AM
Reply #16

Faijer

  • Veritas Moderator
  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****
  • Existential Pragmatist

  • 3201
  • Karma:
    40
  • Personal Text
    The Devil's Advocate
    • View Profile
    • WordPress Blog
As I said, this statement is true. Funny how people overlooked that as me spouting nonsense, only to go onto to regurgitate the nonsense of subjective or relative truths.

There isn't really anything relative or subjective about truth. That's what's known as opinion, or something that simply isn't true. People will label it as "truth", because the word truth is much more powerful than the word opinion.

For anyone who believes that there are subjective 'truths', please provide an example.
My WordPress Blog is updated regularly.
NEW UPDATE: Life begins at conception: A thought experiment (29/08/2012)

February 27, 2007, 11:54:11 AM
Reply #17

The Jacket

  • Veritas Furniture

  • Offline
  • ****

  • 384
  • Karma:
    1
  • Personal Text
    Just to the right side of wrong.
    • View Profile
If by truth, you merely mean facts, then yes, you are correct. 

If by truth, you mean reality, well thats something all together different.
Every thing you know is wrong! Only what you dont know is true. Surely then the wisest man is he who knows nothing! By knowing nothing, clearly you know everything that isn't, and therefore everything that is.

February 27, 2007, 12:14:05 PM
Reply #18

Steve

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 3685
  • Karma:
    139
    • View Profile
Actually, saying "this statement is true" becomes a circular argument. It's true only if it's true, and the only evidence of it's truth is it's own conjecture which is not the same thing as being factual. There is no fact in the statement "this statement is true" unless it really is true, but without good enough evidence to prove it's factual it remains just a conjecture. And a conjecture is simply a proclamation of something being factual, not fact in itself.

~Steve
Mastery does not occur when you've performed a feat once or twice. Instead, it comes after years of training, when you realize that you no longer notice when you're performing a feat which used to require so much effort. Even walking takes years of training for a human: why not everything else?

February 27, 2007, 12:22:54 PM
Reply #19

kobok

  • Tech Team
  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****
  • Veritas Council

  • 4988
  • Karma:
    171
  • Personal Text
    Veritas Council
    • View Profile
Its just like making the rule "Every Rule has an Exception".  The rule acctually breaks itself, since every rule must have an exception (acording to that rule) then there can be no exception to that absolute rule.

...  If that rule is its own exception, then wouldn't that just confirm what that rule says?  I see no conflict there.  :)

True or truth is what you make it to be,

In the sense that we can alter the contents and arrangement of things in reality if we go through the proper steps to do so, yes.  But if you mean in the sense that what we believe to be true is true, then no, absolutely not.  If a delusional man thinks he can fly, and jumps off a building to prove this, his belief is irrelevant.  If he cannot actually fly, he will fall and die.  (This has been tested and demonstrated many times throughout history, so it is hard to argue against it.)

Its just like how some people say their religion is true and not yours, and the opposite way around.

All this means is that most people are wrong, or at least partially wrong, on this topic.  It has no reflection on what is actually true.

The other thing that is true is when everyone agrees on something to be the way it is.

Was the world flat when most people thought it was?  Where is the evidence of the democratic nature of truth to counter the volumes of evidence that truth is not democratic?

Actually, saying "this statement is true" becomes a circular argument. It's true only if it's true, and the only evidence of it's truth is it's own conjecture which is not the same thing as being factual.

Also, if the statement "this statement is true" is false, then it is self-consistently false.  So that particular statement achieves self-consistency regardless of its truth status.
Latest article:  Construct Dynamics

Want to learn psi?  Check out our collection of psi articles.

February 27, 2007, 12:40:00 PM
Reply #20

Nereus

  • Veritas Furniture

  • Offline
  • ****
  • Kher Heb

  • 363
  • Karma:
    4
  • Personal Text
    Step I
    • View Profile
    • -
If by truth, you merely mean facts, then yes, you are correct. 

If by truth, you mean reality, well thats something all together different.

The sheer amount of intellectual masturbation in this thread makes my head asplode.

"Facts" and "reality" aren't different.
Reality is, essentially, what is real. Obviously.
Facts are anything which exists. For something to be factual, is for something to be real. And thus a piece of reality.

There's nothing "mere" about facts. Granted, one can argue that much of what we claim as factual is, in fact (hurr~), not.
But please, enlighten us. How is truth in context to facts and in context to reality two entirely different beasts?
Sometimes my shadow leads, or it follows me, but we never seem to become one and the same.

February 27, 2007, 01:02:54 PM
Reply #21

Shadowx089

  • Veritas Furniture

  • Offline
  • ****
  • Regular Member

  • 409
  • Karma:
    -6
  • Personal Text
    Regular Member
    • View Profile
How many time do we have to go through this?

Truth is what you make it to be.
However you can make something true to you but to the rest of the world its not true.
So if you don't want to figure out if things are true or not, then you can just go with the majority.
If your trying to figure it out on your own, then what is true to you is what you make it out to be.

This is truth, this is true.

NO BUTTS ABOUT IT OR I"LL SEND MY DOG TO BITE YOU, RIP HIS ANKLES OFF!   :teethy: + :dog:= Mad Dog
Comfort of the Lord, comforted by God.
If nothing existed but the Source and the Source - Created everything - Is the Creation from the Source? - If the Creation can behold intelligence - Then does the Source also have intelligence? - After all - The Source was far more than its Creation.

February 27, 2007, 09:29:44 PM
Reply #22

Tsumaru

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 1780
  • Karma:
    0
    • View Profile
Quote
How many time do we have to go through this?

Truth is what you make it to be.
Only as many times as it takes before you can give a logical justification for your assertion.

As Kobok said, a man can believe he can fly. He can even jump off a building to prove he can fly. But I'm sorry, he will plummet to the ground due to gravity. What have we learnt from this example?
Assuming that what we are experiencing right now actually exists and is not in any way a dream or delusion (read Descartes' Meditation I from Meditations on First Philosophy), then we can know:
1. Gravity truthfully exists on this world.
2. A man cannot fly
3. A man cannot fly, even if he wholeheartedly believes he can and thinks it to be true
And probably a whole number of other things, including the stupidity of men and so forth.

The only valid rebuttal to this example is the one along the lines of that what we are experiencing is not 'real' as per The Matrix for example. However, such a debate is irrelevant to the topic (as we would be debating what our reality consists of, and not what truth is). The fact of the matter is - no matter how much someone believes something to be true, if it does not have a base in reality and fact then, quite simply, it is not true.
don't believe everything you read... especially if it comes from me.

February 28, 2007, 04:23:29 AM
Reply #23

The Jacket

  • Veritas Furniture

  • Offline
  • ****

  • 384
  • Karma:
    1
  • Personal Text
    Just to the right side of wrong.
    • View Profile
Quote
...  If that rule is its own exception, then wouldn't that just confirm what that rule says?  I see no conflict there.
Thats exactly my point.  :cool:

Quote
How is truth in context to facts and in context to reality two entirely different beasts?

Truth in facts is information.  Such as You have blue eyes, tan skin, and blond hair.
The reality would be that you wear colord contacts, go to a taning bed, and dye your hair. But thats just for this example.
It is simple to define facts.  People write books full of them all the time.

To know the truth of reality is to actually know reality, beyond the shadow of a doubt.  How do you know what you see is really there?  Maybe blue to you is green to me.  What I see as blue, you may see as (defined by my perception) green, but you would still call it blue, because to you that would be its name. How can you tell that what you percieve is true? 
Can you give concrete evidence that your perception of reality is true?
Every thing you know is wrong! Only what you dont know is true. Surely then the wisest man is he who knows nothing! By knowing nothing, clearly you know everything that isn't, and therefore everything that is.

February 28, 2007, 02:38:31 PM
Reply #24

Shadowx089

  • Veritas Furniture

  • Offline
  • ****
  • Regular Member

  • 409
  • Karma:
    -6
  • Personal Text
    Regular Member
    • View Profile
Quote
The only valid rebuttal to this example is the one along the lines of that what we are experiencing is not 'real' as per The Matrix for example. However, such a debate is irrelevant to the topic (as we would be debating what our reality consists of, and not what truth is). The fact of the matter is - no matter how much someone believes something to be true, if it does not have a base in reality and fact then, quite simply, it is not true.

*Breaths* This is your believes, truth does not always fall under mans facts or reality.
How to say this so you can understand it is near impossible, because you are have woven up the meaning with other things you forget what truth is in the first place. I can't see how I can explain what I said before any easy-er. Perhaps its just not complicated to enough to make sense to some of you people. But it is correct that that i know, and its not based on facts or believes. Its based off what truth is to humans, nothing else.
Comfort of the Lord, comforted by God.
If nothing existed but the Source and the Source - Created everything - Is the Creation from the Source? - If the Creation can behold intelligence - Then does the Source also have intelligence? - After all - The Source was far more than its Creation.

February 28, 2007, 04:46:57 PM
Reply #25

Steve

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 3685
  • Karma:
    139
    • View Profile
It's so sad that your generation grew up in a time where the word "truth" has been distorted and given excess or different understandings than it has been used to denote previously. Truth is not subjective, nor is it different for each person. It is based in fact and reality, and in fact one of the definitions for truth relates directly to factual reality. "2. conformity with fact or reality; verity: the truth of a statement."

Truth does not change simply because someone doesn't like it, or doesn't accept it. Truth doesn't change just because someone understands something differently than someone else. Truth doesn't change as you grow older and more wise (or foolish). Truth is simply what is true; facts, reality.

~Steve
Mastery does not occur when you've performed a feat once or twice. Instead, it comes after years of training, when you realize that you no longer notice when you're performing a feat which used to require so much effort. Even walking takes years of training for a human: why not everything else?

February 28, 2007, 08:41:13 PM
Reply #26

The Jacket

  • Veritas Furniture

  • Offline
  • ****

  • 384
  • Karma:
    1
  • Personal Text
    Just to the right side of wrong.
    • View Profile
Does everyone just skip over what I say?

Fact and reality are not the same thing.
Its correct to say that for something to be a fact it must exist in reality, but reality does not need facts to exists. If you look at them as the same thing then you're missing half the picture.

Like I said before. If truth to you means only facts, then its fairly simple to define. But if you define truth as reality, how do you define reality? 

If it were as simple as some people make it sound then we wouldnt be having this conversation, and the debate on this topic wouldnt date back hundreds of years.
Every thing you know is wrong! Only what you dont know is true. Surely then the wisest man is he who knows nothing! By knowing nothing, clearly you know everything that isn't, and therefore everything that is.

February 28, 2007, 09:03:16 PM
Reply #27

Prodeus

  • Veritas Furniture

  • Offline
  • ****

  • 388
  • Karma:
    0
  • Personal Text
    Qabalist~Alchemist~Magician | Veritas Mentor |
    • View Profile
    • Shrine of the Magnum Opus
Shadow:  You are missing the point.  What you speak of (in this case, flying) is an exception to a rule.  This does not by any means inply that truth is subjective.  In fact, truth by its very nature cannot be subjective, for then it would cease to be truth.  This is one reason why organized religion can, many times, have a difficult time being objectively logical, if it ever is at all. 

If we are to look at your example (a man flying) from the perspective of a magicician or psion, then is it true that a man can fly?  Yes.  There are many accounts of this, and science has not accepted it for one reason or another.  Looking at what can be accomplished through magic, flying would be a sinple parlor trick compared to other, more impressive feats that are not simply occult powers.  Flight is possible via levitation.  Franz Bardon teaches a method by which levitation may be eventually accomplished, and from there he goes on to tell how physical flight is possible.

Truth can not be in opposition with itself.  In fact, it can do nothing bu align itself with itself, as truth only woks with an identical truth.  It is objective in the most logical sense.  Is psychokinesis possible?  Yes.  Therefore, levitation must be possible.  If that is possible, then flight would not be very far away.  However, whether or not a universal principle or "truth" is accepted by orgainized science does not make it subjective or objective.  Truth can only be objective.

Reality exists objectively, this is true.  It is not subjective, and this is known because we exist (logically, we exist in some form or another) and we experience reality.

If only one person in the world knows a truth and the rest of the world does not believe it, then the truth is still not subjective.  It is objective, but many people are simply ignorant.

If a person believes in something, that is still an opinion.  An opinion will not by itself constitute an more than a delusion if it is applied to a scenario such as flight.  As we have discussed above, if you believe reality to be subjective, it doesn't work.  Reality is still objective, but your just ignorant, careless, or apathetic to the truth.

There is an organization which believes the world is flat (seriously).  Now, is the world flat to them, truly?  Absolutely not.  It is objectively round and sphereical, as has been demonstrated and proven by science many times.  That organization is ignorant, but they believe something.  That belief does not objectively affect the objective world.  No belief can.  If belief can affect the environment, it is only because there is a law being applied which is unknown or not widely accepted, such as psionics or magic.

An individual who believes something which is actually false does not change their own reality, they simply subconsciously ignore that which is not alligned with their opinion.  if you observe modern religion, this is done often, for good and bad ends.
"My soul is a block of clay,
my sculpting tools are the sacred sciences,
and my Opus Magnum
is the way up the mountain,
the Path of Return..."

{[(|~-LVX-~|)]}

Oriens Lvx Lucis

February 28, 2007, 10:16:57 PM
Reply #28

Tsumaru

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 1780
  • Karma:
    0
    • View Profile
Quote
If we are to look at your example (a man flying) from the perspective of a magicician or psion, then is it true that a man can fly?  Yes.  There are many accounts of this, and science has not accepted it for one reason or another.  Looking at what can be accomplished through magic, flying would be a sinple parlor trick compared to other, more impressive feats that are not simply occult powers.  Flight is possible via levitation.  Franz Bardon teaches a method by which levitation may be eventually accomplished, and from there he goes on to tell how physical flight is possible.
That is a debate unto itself and just complicates the discussion, not to mention being irrelevant as far as I can see.

Quote
Truth in facts is information.  Such as You have blue eyes, tan skin, and blond hair.
The reality would be that you wear colord contacts, go to a taning bed, and dye your hair.
No, what you are talking about is perception and facts for the first example. The second two examples are just irrelevant. I perceive that you have blue eyes. In reality, and factually, your eyes only appear to be blue due to coloured contacts. I perceive that you have tanned skin, but in reality that skin colour is not natural due to a tanning bed. I perceive that you have blonde hair, but in reality your natural hair colour is black and you dye your hair.
Facts and Reality: Brown eyes, artificially tanned skin, dyed blonde hair
Perception: Blue eyes, tanned skin, blonde hair
There is no distinction between facts and reality. Facts are isolated pieces of information about reality. Truth is something in accordance with reality. Facts are truthful. They are all interrelated.

Quote
Maybe blue to you is green to me.  What I see as blue, you may see as (defined by my perception) green, but you would still call it blue, because to you that would be its name.
That is a semantic debate. That is a difference in language and terms, and not a difference in reality. Let me use your same example but in a different context. You look at the colour of this text. I call it "black", you call it "black", a French person calls it "noir". The colour is the same for all of us, but we have different terms. The reality is still there though.
A different example. Now, if we have blue and red, and there is a colour-blind person. My father cannot see a few colours like red, green, blue etc. They all just look the same to him (I think they look like a kind of greeny-orangey-browney colour. I looked it up one time.) Now, he might see a certain colour and think it is red. He says it is red. In reality, it's green. His perception is that it is red. What he has is not a different truth and reality, but an incorrect perception. His eyes do not work properly, or the visual cortex of his brain does not work properly, or something like that. His perception fails, truth is not different.

Quote
To know the truth of reality is to actually know reality, beyond the shadow of a doubt.  How do you know what you see is really there? ...  How can you tell that what you percieve is true?
Can you give concrete evidence that your perception of reality is true?
I have touched on this already. Reality still exists, perception fails. But reality, truth, and facts are still there. Still objective. Still irrelevant to our perception.
I also recommended that people read Rene Descartes' work Meditations on First Philosophy. This addresses quite well the kind of topic you are talking about. Let me summarize it for you.
Descartes realises that we often dream, we may sometimes hallucinate. He sees that is not uncommon for us to believe in a reality which is not there. He sees that a stick half in a pond looks bent, and that there are optical illusions. He realises, then, that our senses can deceive us and not always be trusted.
He moves on to question that how do we know our senses are not lying to us right now? How do we know that we aren't dreaming this very minute? How do we know there is not some deceitful demon who forces illusions upon us always, creating a 'reality' which does not exist?
He follows a series of logical arguments to conclude that we cannot know with a certainty anything about what exists. Everything is open to a justifiable doubt.
What he does reason, though, is that he knows that he exists. Cogito ergo sum, I think therefore I am. Right that moment, he was thinking. He was doubting, he was philosophizing. He was aware of consciousness. He knew, then, that he must exist in some fashion. You cannot be deceived into thinking you exist when you don't. However, everything else was up to doubt. The only thing we can be sure of, is ourself.
Now, this is all well and good, but it's irrelevant. This is, again, a discussion on perception. Whether our perception is wrong or not is irrelevant, as an objective reality would still exist outside of our perception. Truth, facts, reality. They are all still objective and existent, despite what we think, feel, perceive, believe.

Quote
*Breaths* This is your believes, truth does not always fall under mans facts or reality.
How to say this so you can understand it is near impossible, because you are have woven up the meaning with other things you forget what truth is in the first place. I can't see how I can explain what I said before any easy-er. Perhaps its just not complicated to enough to make sense to some of you people. But it is correct that that i know, and its not based on facts or believes. Its based off what truth is to humans, nothing else.
I had a lot of trouble understanding this post. You were barely coherent. Please rephrase it again with your next post, or try to explain better.
What I did pick up, however, was the implication that I do not know what truth is. That is absolutely incorrect. Truth is a word in the English language. Thus, truth has a definition. And the definition of truth can therefore be found in a dictionary. And the dictionary definition of truth states that it is something which is in accordance and conformity with reality and facts, something which actually is. This is what truth is. You are the one who seems to have some misconceptions about it all. You are also the one who fails to put forth a logical argument and justification to your beliefs on the subjective nature of truth, whereas everyone else is managing to back up their opinions with logic.
don't believe everything you read... especially if it comes from me.

March 02, 2007, 04:31:40 PM
Reply #29

Big Boss

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****
  • Friggen Crazy

  • 1458
  • Karma:
    3
  • Personal Text
    Owner of 100000 V-Points
    • View Profile
    • I'm a trendy blogger now.
the main problem with defining truth as something that actually occurs and is present in reality and is factual and whatnot, is that those things are all determined by our perception of them. sure, that doesn't sound like such a bad thing, but our perception is rarely reliable. take this example. you go shopping, and you find a shirt you like. the shirt appears red, and you want a red shirt to go with your khaki pants, or whatever. you get home, and you find out that the shirt is closer to brown than red. you spent that money on a red shirt! what gives. turns out, your perception was altered by some excessive red and yellow lighting in the store.

for this reason, obviously, we prefer objective evidence from multiple studies over a long course of time, and we rely on classic logic, rather than minimal logic, to make decisions as to what is "true," but the very nature of truth, especially in a spiritual sense, is almost exclusively subjective, making the process of defining truth nearly meaningless.
Join my Folding@Home team and do some good! #159490

Details at http://folding.stanford.edu/