Exploring Truth: Objectively and Subjectively

[wittgenstein]

The common sense view is that truth is the correspondence of a concept to reality. This is called the correspondence theory of truth. However, since the correspondence theory of truth is a concept, in order for it to be true it must correspond to reality. What could that reality be? Another correspondence of truth? Clearly, truth is hard to define.

 

[baywax]

Clearly, truth is hard to define.

It is hard to define. Perhaps there are two categories such as:

Relative Truth... ie: what I perceive is my truth (this can include mistaken identities like the mound of brown dirt being mistaken as a bear. The result is the same as if a bear were truly there... heart rate rises, adrenaline is released etc... but the truth formulated from my perception is incorrect)

Actual Truth... ie: the mound of brown dirt is a mound of brown dirt not a bear. Many truths compile to create this actual truth. How the mound of dirt got there, what is it's composition(?), how I got there, how the light made it look like a bear... and so on...

 

[buffordboy23]

So, I would propose that Truth not be determined by "how long" its been true but determined by simply if it is true or not... as in... "is it happening?", "is the observer interacting with the phenomenon in the present?"... and this has to be verified by the observer and the phenomenon "experiencing" one another simultaneously. This would apply to experiencing a "thought" and could apply to experiencing a "tree" or "wave "

Let me modify my old definitions in light of this info.

Let T be the set that contains every instant of time in reality, t; V be the set of two elements, "true" and "false"; and X(t) the function that maps T for some observable (e.g. I exist) onto the set V. Then,
1. the function X(t) is a truth, if there exists some t, X(t) = true.
2. the function X(t) is an absolute truth if and only if for every t, X(t) = true.

 

[baywax]

Let me modify my old definitions in light of this info.

Let T be the set that contains every instant of time in reality, t; V be the set of two elements, "true" and "false"; and X(t) the function that maps T for some observable (e.g. I exist) onto the set V. Then,
1. the function X(t) is a truth, if there exists some t, X(t) = true.
2. the function X(t) is an absolute truth if and only if for every t, X(t) = true.

There you go, less time dependent.

What is it when you have all these truths intersecting to create one more?
What's that called. Synergy...?... as in a synergy of truths?

 

[buffordboy23]

What is it when you have all these truths intersecting to create one more? What's that called. Synergy...?... as in a synergy of truths?

Hmmm...interesting idea. I never thought about it but I would agree with you. I'm trying to picture what a graph of it would like for the current evolution of our universe as we know it.

 

[baywax]

Hmmm...interesting idea. I never thought about it but I would agree with you. I'm trying to picture what a graph of it would like for the current evolution of our universe as we know it.

It would look like a genealogical chart. Much like the passing along of mutations... using those to trace the origin of the species. Although here the "mutation" would be a "truth". All of this would begin with one, simple, basic and profound truth (or "phenomenon").

However, the number of truths that create a new one is not limited to a pair of truths interacting... it can be a large number interacting. Unlike the conventional diploidy required to create an offspring in life. Because of this, today we are subjected to what seems like an infinite number of truths. But all of these are the "offspring" of one rather monsterous event or truth... at least.. according to this scenario. The shear number and gradients of truths today makes it difficult to discern which is basic and which is secondary... what is half truth and what is hidden truth.

Can truth be hidden?

 

[baywax]

One more sub-topic.

Truth vs Belief...

what are the percentages of commonality here?

Do I have to start a poll in a new thread?

 

[baywax]

The truth I'm trying to describe or discover is the kind of truth that
would be true to an anteater as well as to the human animal. It would
be such a purely true truth that it transcends specie's awareness and
remains "true" to itself. Does this make sense?

 

[baywax]

In the thread "Do I need to know the truth?" I came up with these two definitions for "truth" and "absolute truth".

Truth: is the accurate and objective description of an event or events

Absolute Truth: is the event or events

Any comments?