What is 'Truth' ?
2007.07.18 3:23

Truth includes things that have already verified. Truth doesn't include things that have not verified yet. Does truth include things that cannot verify? Some people insist that 'God is almighty, it's truth.'
List all Journal entries
What is 'Truth' ? I am willing to help test Slashdot's New Discussion System.
What is 'Truth' ? Preferences Top 11 comments Search Discussion
Display OptionsThreshold: -1: 11 comments 0: 10 comments 1: 9 comments 2: 5 comments 3: 0 comments 4: 0 comments 5: 0 comments Flat Nested No Comments Threaded Oldest First Newest First Highest Scores First Oldest First (Ignore Threads) Newest First (Ignore Threads) Save:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
"Truth"?(Score:1, Flamebait)
by johndiii (229824) * <.moc.tsolima. .ta. .iiidnhoj.> on 2007.07.18 5:03 (#19892077) (Last Journal: 2007.07.19 8:54)
Truth includes things that have already verified. That is a meaningless statement. Verification is the process of determining whether or not something is true. All that you are doing is defining "truth" as those things that are known to be true. That isn't a good definition, though. "Truth" is all those things that are true, whether or not they are known as such. Your definition also might include things in "truth" that are actually not true, due to mistakes or flaws in the verification process. And it doesn't account for things that are formally undecidable, as per Gödel's incompleteness theorem (which states that any sufficiently powerful formal system contains propositions that are true but not provable within the system).
--As you wish.
[ Reply to This ]
Re:"Truth"?(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.20 3:28 (#19917923) (http://www.blogger.com/profile/00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.07.18 3:23)
Thank you for your very useful comment. There are many things to consider in each point you made in your comment. I'll enbrace them in writing next articles.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters
[ Reply to This Parent ]
Short answer: Yes(Score:0, Redundant)
by Morosoph (693565) on 2007.07.18 8:30 (#19894803) (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/tim.wesson/ Last Journal: 2007.06.10 2:25)
Does truth include things that cannot verify?Jondiii got it right; truth exists independently of our knowledge of it, and therefore verification isn't the point. This doesn't mean that verification isn't important, for we all want knowledge of truth.
Our lack of knowledge naturally means that we are inclined to disagree, but our disagreement doesn't change what is true; it only changes our opinion of it.
--My Amigos. Your Amigos.
[ Reply to This ]
Re:Short answer: Yes(Score:2)
by johndiii (229824) * <.moc.tsolima. .ta. .iiidnhoj.> on 2007.07.19 12:15 (#19910081) (Last Journal: 2007.07.19 8:54)
Interesting moderation in this JE, don't you think?
--As you wish.
[ Reply to This Parent ]
Re:Short answer: Yes(Score:1)
by Jeremiah Cornelius (137) on 2007.07.19 12:24 (#19910155) (Last Journal: 2007.07.19 23:11)
Yeah. Looks like you have a doctrinaire Christian in Mercedo's friend list. Morosoph gets knocked, and even the lengthy anonymous comment is modded down - like that matters in a JE for someone with no UID!Style is a good way to ID the ACs, tho'. I notice typographical and punctuation convention "tells" that give some regulars away. Foolish to mod such a post down - just an expression of anger.All Love,Jeremiah "secret pre-Raphaelite and Byronic romantic" Cornelius
--So I pass that on to you.Write it down, and put it in your computer, so you can forget it.
[ Reply to This Parent ]
Philosophy and Religion(Score:1)
by Morosoph (693565) on 2007.07.19 22:58 (#19913619) (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/tim.wesson/ Last Journal: 2007.06.10 2:25)
I am concerned with the state of debate over the internet, mostly with USians. Is philosophy to once again be minimised, even oppressed in the light of its threat to doctrinare belief?
I suppose that arguably Mer Cedo is reaching for faith, and in answering his statements about the nature of truth, we are failing to take his attempts at faithfulness seriously. Mer Cedo has stated elsewhere that he views reality as subjective, so that verificiation, consensus and belief, rather than pre-eminent existance are his stating points; to some extent, we're being cheeky with our answers that assume the objectivity of anything that deserves the title of "truth".
I've met this kind of relativism surprisingly frequently from Christians; perhaps it is in part a response to neo-darwinists and other (frequently atheistic) scientists and their fans claiming objectivity. It's much easier to carve a space for one's preferred beliefs in a relativistic space than in an environment where truth is considered to be singular, if unknown, so that relativism is a considerably more effective shield for one's faith in a hostile environment. Additionally, those who tend to look for biblical quotations for strengthening their arguments are already using thinking in a manner that is closer to the relativist than that of the scientist, or mathematician.
On top of that, there is the curious inversion of Leo Strauss's thesis in his book "Persecution and the Art of Writing", where Strauss's analysis of how thinkers obscured their thinking from the casual reader so that their work, and frequently themselves would survive, or (and the theistic side) so that their work would not be used for the persecution of philosophers despite the authour's disagreement with them. The inversion being that a "responsible" thinker is now expected to write in such a way, so as to leave the masses ignorant.
Sadly, Strauss writes in a style where he expresses forcefully what the writer that he is commenting upon is saying, so that it is easy for the careless reader to take Strauss's rendition as Strauss's view, but if you do that, you end up with contradictions between he views as he's commenting upon different writers, as if he has no mind of his own. Better to look to what he says about Thucydides regarding his commentry on the Peloponnesian war (City and Man, paperback ed. 1978, page 144):
"...the fact that a Thucylidean character expresses a given view proves that that view was known to Thucydides; it may therefore be used for completing a view stated by Thucydides himself if the former view is evidently implied in the latter view. Far from impairing Thucydides' reticence, the speeches only increase it. Since he is so reticent regarding the universals and the speeches are so rich in pithily and forcefully expressed statements regarding them, he as it were seduces the readers into taking these statements as expressing his own view. The temptation becomes almost irresistable when the speakers express views which no intelligent or decent man seems able to gainsay."That Strauss himself is so hard to read is a feature that I like about Strauss; I feel that he isn't telling me how I should think. Many people see a sinister motive in his enigmatic presentation; particularly political readers who want to know which side someone is on, rather than consider the ideas presented in their own terms. To my mind, Strauss is treating the reader as an adult. It is a shame that so many of his readers are small-minded partisans.
--My Amigos. Your Amigos.
[ Reply to This Parent ]
Re:Philosophy and Religion(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.20 4:06 (#19918193) (http://www.blogger.com/profile/00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.07.18 3:23)
I am as scientific as I have been. But what scientific means is problematic. In ancient times people believe heavy objects drop faster than light ones, the earth is flat, the earth revolves around the sun. Basically many people who learned science know those three statements are not true. But in our ordinary life those three are very correct and true. My point is that the truth changes if conditions change too. I'm not going to undermine the value of science.
I suppose that arguably Mer Cedo is reaching for faith,
I am secular, I used to be, will be so forever.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters
[ Reply to This Parent ]
Hah!(Score:1)
by Morosoph (693565) on 2007.07.19 23:13 (#19913807) (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/tim.wesson/ Last Journal: 2007.06.10 2:25)
Well I probably deserved it, mis-spelling your pseudonym as I did!
--My Amigos. Your Amigos.
[ Reply to This Parent ]
Re:Short answer: Yes(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.20 3:42 (#19917985) (http://www.blogger.com/profile/00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.07.18 3:23)
Your statement is simply correct.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters
[ Reply to This Parent ]
Truth is Absolute Reality(Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on 2007.07.18 15:49 (#19897819)
Truth is not mediated by the senses, the intellect, nor the psyche.The world is a veil on Truth.God is Truth."Other than God" is a ludicrous fallacy. There is only Truth, "Other than Truth" does not, by its nature as fallacy, exist.Haqq, Brahma, Tao. The names of this endless ocean are many - its essence is the Unity, not the many names given under the shadow of the apparent world.The Delphic Oracle says: "Know thyself, and thou shalt know the Cosmos."Jesus says: "the Kingdom of Heaven in within you."Saint Clement says: "He who knows himself knows God."Gautama Buddha says: "Look within. Thou art Buddha."Siddha Yoga holds: "God dwells within you as You."In the Q'ran is written: "He who knows himself knows his Lord."Seeking other than the Truth is self-deception, but Truth cannot be attained by intellectual means.
One night, Nasruddin's neighbors found him, crawling around on his hands and knees under a lamppost."What are you looking for?" they asked him."I've lost the key to my house," he replied.They all got down to help him look, but after a fruitless time of searching, one neighbor thought to ask him - just where he had lost the key in the first place?"Oh. In my house!" Nasruddin answered."Then why are you looking under the lamppost?" he was asked, impatiently.Nasruddin replied, "Well, it is dark in my house, of course!The lamp of intellect does not illuminate the house. When Diogenes as similarly asked why he carried a lamp in the broad daylight, he responded "I am looking for one that knows the truth!" The lesson of this was lost on those who have recorded the deeds of Diogenes - and his rivals branded him "cynic," meaning one who barks meaninglessly like a dog and not engaging in proper philosophical discourse. The lamp of discourse would never illuminate the abode of truth - and in misunderstanding he is even misquoted today as one looking for "an honest man."All of this is the essential teaching of Jesus, as relayed by the Secret Gospel of Thomas, destroyed by the Priestly enemies of Truth:
"Jesus said, If your leaders say to you "Look! The Kingdom is in the sky then the birds will be there before you are. If they say that the Kingdom is in the sea, then the fish will be there before you are. Rather, the Kingdom is within you and it is outside of you."(Saying 3a)"His disciples said to him: Show us the place you are, for it is essential for us to seek it. He responded: He who has ears let him hear. There is light within a man of light, and he lights up all of the world. If he is not alight there is darkness."(Saying 24)"Jesus said: When you give rise to that which is within you, what you have will save you. If you do not give rise to it, what you do not have will destroy you."(Saying 70)That "Man of Light" is the only one who can teach how to find this. Some are struck with realization, but they are unable to explain what they witness. They are rarer than proverbial hen's teeth! But the Truth is known to some in every time - they are hidden from the insincere seeker, by the same ignorance that caused Diogenes to be misunderstood, down to this very day.The Man of Light would not be accepted by ordinary seekers - he would not appear "holy" - even ridiculing many of the pieties of religion. He will have both fools and sages among his followers, and contempt for this condition hides his being from the casual seeker. Without knowing they have done so, they fail even the very first test.I guess that leaves us with Bayazid Bestami, who I will quote - like a tape recorder, accurately but not comprehending:
"I never saw any lamp shining more brilliantly than the lamp of silence."
[ Reply to This ]
Re:Truth is Absolute Reality(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.20 4:10 (#19918249) (http://www.blogger.com/profile/00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.07.18 3:23)
Whoever you are thanks for posting this comment. It contains a lot of useful information.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters
[ Reply to This Parent ]