Skip to main content

VERITY - What is Truth?

  • Author:
  • Updated date:
there-is-no-truth-truth-resolves-to-opinion
there-is-no-truth-truth-resolves-to-opinion
Who is YOUR favorite celebrity of 'truth'?

Who is YOUR favorite celebrity of 'truth'?

Is truth based on what an AUTHORITATIVE figure decrees??

Is truth based on what an AUTHORITATIVE figure decrees??

INTRODUCTION

This article exposes the Religion of Truth. You will understand why "truth" is the Hallmark of Religion. You will understand why the word TRUTH ultimately resolves to a synonym of the word OPINION.

We understand all concepts because we define them. If someone comes along and invents a word, say “klamokaptica”....it is very easy to make this word God-like by associating tons of mysticism around it. And, it is even easier to brainwash the whole population to parrot this word day in and day out for the rest of their lives, by simply appealing to authority, emotion and the unknown.

It doesn’t work that way for the rest of us who are critical thinkers. We simply ask this person to unambiguously define the key word which makes or breaks their argument: TRUTH. All concepts are defined. There is no avoiding it!

If you cannot define it, then you have NO business using it in a sentence in front of an audience, got it?



WHAT IS TRUTH?

"The word “truth” is a concept that has been conceived by humans for use as a conceptual label of validation on statement types known as propositions. Propositions are statements which propose an alleged case or scenario. This anthropocentric concept of truth is used by many people to intentionally decree a label of “validated acceptance” (i.e. true) or of “validated rejection” (i.e. false) to propositional statements.

But since truth ultimately stems from the validation of propositions, it necessitates an observer who must VALIDATE the proposition before they can label it as ‘true’ or ‘false’. It is obvious that the word “truth” is ultimately dependent on a dynamic process that an observer must perform before labeling a proposition as true/false. This process of validation is called PROOF. A proposition labeled as true/false is always dependent on a human observer’s ability to use their magical powers to validate it as such.

Q: So how do humans validate or prove a statement as truth? What magical powers do they use?

A: Their subjective and limited sensory system!

Since the concept of truth is ultimately dependent on a human’s subjective use of their limited sensory system, it is easy to understand why all truths are subjective; i.e. opinions. Truth is an observer-dependent human-related concept that is inherently subjective. As such, it necessarily resolves to none other than opinion! This limited anthropocentric concept cannot possibly be objective. What is TRUE to you, is a LIE to your neighbor! Your Priest may have convinced YOU of the truth for God, dark matter, black holes, warped space and dark energy, but he hasn’t convinced your neighbor. Truths are inherently biased. Truth is what is dear to YOUR heart & soul, only. Truth means that the authority you worship managed to convince you to believe his statements.

For all intents and purposes, you can use the word “truth” as a synonym to the word “opinion” in every scenario, and you will not change the context or meaning of your dissertation. Just try it and see for yourself.

Remember: TRUTH = OPINION.

Those who disagree, all they need to do is answer the following questions for the audience:

1) What magical means do they use to resolve their statement as being TRUE? Do they use their sensory system? Do they vote on the issue? Do they ask their Priest, God or a higher authority to decide?

Scroll to Continue

2) Is it TRUE that TRUTH is correct? What standard does one use as a benchmark for testing and evaluating TRUTH to be correct? They obviously cannot use truth!!!

Anybody wanna step in the lion’s den and answer these questions for the audience? Are you scared to answer because you will expose your Religion of Truth, or is it because you don’t know? Just be honest with yourself."



PHILOSOPHERS HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO DEFINE TRUTH FOR THE PAST 3000 YEARS!!!

If you search any academic text of Philosophy, you will be shocked to discover that there is not a single OBJECTIVE definition for the word “truth” anywhere to be found. You may find hundreds of out-of-context half-baked annotations which contradict each other. But these are not definitions by any stretch of the imagination. A definition needs to be first and foremost, objective! This means that the definition cannot invoke observers or their opinions. Furthermore, a definition must be unambiguous and should be able to be used consistently in your dissertation. Finally, a definition must not be contradictory. If someone can contradict it, then it belongs in the trash.

Not a single human has ever defined “truth” objectively and unambiguously in the past 3000 years. So when a human ape invokes the word “truth” in a sentence, what do they mean? Just ask any person for a definition of this formidable word and they will get very offended and run away.



TRUTH IS THE HALLMARK OF RELIGION AND THE ART OF PERSUASION!

The Ancient Greeks already understood that truth was nothing more than OPINION. It was the Sophists of Ancient Greece, like Protagoras , Prodikos , Hippias, Eleios, and Gorgias from Leontini, etc. who persistently advanced the principle that “truth is what suits the individual’s interests”. They had the rationality to understand that there is no truth to be had. But it is rather a human invention that is at best, self-serving.

The Sophists were a bunch of “tricksters” from Athens or other cities, but most came from Ionia. They were not into educating in science, philosophy, mathematics and ethics. They only taught the subtle art of persuasion, and how to “win” over your opponent at any cost. What they taught was called “Rhetoric and Oratory”. Their tools were the concepts of “truth” and “logic”. They taught their students how to argue eloquently and “prove” almost ANY position whether that position was correct or incorrect. Rhetoric is the art of composition and persuasion, while oratory was the art of public speaking. If you are a good speaker with the ability to PERSUADE the audience, then it goes without saying that YOU won the argument because the audience believed YOUR version of the “truth”.

The Sophists had incredible skills in debating and persuading. This is why they educated and trained the sons of well-to-do Athenian citizens. Back then, there were no formal schools of logic and debating. Instead, these were “one-on-one” schools, where the teacher would walk with students and talk with them, teaching them all the “tricks” of debating – for a fee, of course. Rhetoric and oratory were essential “sophistry” skills for Athenian citizens. After all, it was these students who would eventually find themselves debating important issues in the Assembly and the Council of Five Hundred.

In similar fashion, the Systems of Logic we have today, like Classical, Tri-valent, Quantum, Fuzzy, Intuitionist, etc. can be used by present-day “Sophists” to prove almost any statement, no matter how ridiculous it sounds.

How could this be, you ask?

Because each system of logic is based on rules called axioms. All rules are invented by man to set a foundational context of inference. All inference is thus applicable to that context, only; and never outside of it. In Quantum Logic it is PROVEN that a ball exists and doesn’t exist on the table at the same time. This has been validated with observations! So for a person to CLAIM that their Classical Laws of Logic are correct, then such an individual doesn’t understand the concepts of axioms and Systems of Logic.

The bottom line is this: truth is the Hallmark of Religion. It is Religionists who advanced the concept of “truth” to a God-like status we have today. It is Religionists who have all the truths....especially the “absolute” ones! Rational humans don’t have truths. Rational humans are critical thinkers who are able to explain and justify what they say.



WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED?


TRUTH = OPINION!

It is very clear that the Internet Personas who profess the doctrine of “truth” are ignorant on the Philosophical issue and its ramifications. They don’t understand the topic nor the arguments that have been revolving around this term for thousands of years.

If not a single Philosopher in the past 3000 years has been able to define “truth”, .....then what makes these clowns on the Internet today think that they are blessed with the gift of knowing “truth”?


"Define truth and it shall set you free" -- fatfist

Comments

fatfist (author) on June 26, 2014:

"and I do not know a single person here in the states that even understands that there is a problem"

Well, that's what happens when you have Atheists, Theists, Mathematicians, Born Again Christians, Scientologists and Jehovah's Witnesses alike all using the exact same tools to push their Religion; namely: TRUTH, ABSOLUTES, KNOWLEDGE, OBSERVATION, PROOF, BELIEF.

None of these idiots understand the Scientific Method (Hypothesis + Theory) or the difference between objects and concepts. Hence their gravitation towards irrationality and contradictions; i.e. Religion!

Alan on June 26, 2014:

"I just cannot fathom why Americans have so much trouble understanding concepts, relations, associations, etc. Is it because all they teach in the schools of the Good ol’ USA is God and Jesus....and nothing else?? My God!!!"

Yes! This is exactly what is going on here in the states. Everything is posiond by religion here. It takes a great deal of effort to abort these teachings from our minds, and I do not know a single person here in the states that even understands that there is a problem. Even my wife can not recognize this. She can not outgrow her religion of TRUTH. And while I do not blame anyone in the USA for being taught to love their ignorance, I do blame anyone for wanting to remain ignorant.

nicholashesed on May 07, 2013:

I think I understand why I was having a problem with your definition of truth. Proposition and validation is a good definition. When it comes to a life of faith though it gets tricky. I believe all the propositions made by Jesus to be true without validation. It sounds crazy and by the standards of science it certainly is. But faith is an effect or quality which moves one beyond the validation process. It frees one from the limits of empiricism which is fitting since no one has ever seen God. So it is mystical. I couldn't even prove it if I tried.

I inherited the sayings and doings of Jesus from the first Christians who were given validation of Jesus' sayings through what Jesus did, i.e. the Resurrection. After Jesus ascended to Heaven Christians started to try to validate their faith which is really not what Jesus intended since he said "Blessed are those who do not see and yet believe." So know I see some Christians trying to validate their faith to themselves and others. This causes disturbances and gets us nowhere.

nicholashesed on May 07, 2013:

Very good. I think I understand. I think I am rushing through this stuff a bit to quickly.

In any case the only thing I don't is concerning true or false concepts. I am thinking of say Einstein's concept of spacetime. Granted he was sincere in the beginning, he seems to have generated a false concept using false concepts. He should have realized this and then made a statement rejecting his concepts since they do not agree with reality??? Thus I would not have wasted so much time reading all that modern cosmology nonsense. Lol!!!

Alright I think I should take a few hours off from this stuff.

fatfist (author) on May 07, 2013:

“But there is potential in human apes as you call them for generating true concepts”

Truth: a concept of validation for propositional statements.

Truth is an abstract concept that necessarily embodies 2 dependent concepts:

1) A proposition, and

2) Its validation or proof.

Without a proposition, there is nothing for the human to comprehend and attempt to validate (i.e. prove) as true or not. It takes a human observer to empirically prove a proposition by using his sensory system to compare objects referenced in the proposition (i.e. referents). Truth is necessarily EMPIRICAL

Truth is naught but a mere label (think of it like a sticky note) that we place on propositions to show that we empirically validated them. There are no true or false concepts. The concepts of love, morals, virtue, justice, motion, time, location….are not amenable to truth. Concepts are only DEFINED to convey meaning….they are never true or false. Truth is a conceptual label we place on propositions….like a checkmark of sorts.

.

“otherwise we wouldn't even be able to survive.”

Survival is based on using reasoning to determine which path to take……i.e. should I cross through the herd of lions and get eaten, or should I go around them and live another day?

.

“The fact that we have dulled this potential so much is one of the reason's we seem about ready to destroy ourselves.”

Perhaps you are talking about wars and current events. That has to do with human greed rather than truth. The concept of truth has never played any role in human history except in Religion and in academic instead of practical Philosophy. Lies in court are evidence and become TRUTH when the jury & judge are convinced and swallow them….nobody is the wiser. Humans may think they’ve dealing with truth all their lives….but all they’ve been dealing with are petty OPINIONS!

People will do whatever the hell they want to do irrespective of any truth asserted by anyone. The reason is because TRUTH=OPINION. You have your truths…..and your neighbor has his.

.

“But lets say there is only one person person and one object beyond the human person. He will still take in that object and can potentially agree with it.”

Objects are not subject to agreement or disagreement. Objects serve as mediators of phenomena….they perform actions.

nicholashesed on May 06, 2013:

I understand what you say. But there is potential in human apes as you call them for generating true concepts otherwise we wouldn't even be able to survive. The fact that we have dulled this potential so much is one of the reason's we seem about ready to destroy ourselves.

But lets say there is only one person person and one object beyond the human person. He will still take in that object and can potentially agree with it. Right? This scenario is observer-independent. I think?

fatfist (author) on May 06, 2013:

Your definition of truth is subjective because it necessarily depends on an observer and their extremely limited sensory system to interpret properties of objects in reality. What is true to you, is a LIE to your neighbor...and vice versa. Truth always resolves to one's opinion. It is impossible to define truth objectively (i.e. observer-independent).

nicholashesed on May 06, 2013:

before finishing this article (I'm on the second or third paragraph). Let me state my definition of truth:

Truth: agreement between mind and object

Yes truth is a concept. The concept is a relation between two real objects 1. the mind between your ears. 2. the object your mind is in relation with whether that be a star, a micro-organsim, a building, etc.

Truth relates a mind (subjective) with an object beyond the mind (objective). So it cannot be purely subjective. If the mind is in harmony with the real object it is in relation with then it generates a truth [true concept]. If the mind is in disharmony with the real object it is in relation to then it generates an error [false concept].

I would also say that there is abstract truth. The mind generates a true concept of a real object or a truth. The mind relates this truth to another truth stored up thus generating an abstract concept which is an abstract truth. Even though in this example both concepts originate in the mind they are ultimately rooted beyond the mind since they were both originated from a relation with a real object beyond the mind.

Thoughts? Or is it back to the drawing board. Lol!

fatfist (author) on November 15, 2012:

Preston,

“Define Relation for me!?”

The ordinary usage of the term ‘relation’ will suffice. Look it up in the dictionary. There is no disagreement here. The term ‘child’ is a concept....a relation/association. Do you understand? This is simple stuff. The term ‘relation’ is not in contention here. It is the term ‘concept’ that YOU don’t understand.

Did you read the article I referenced? Did you understand it?

I just cannot fathom why Americans have so much trouble understanding concepts, relations, associations, etc. Is it because all they teach in the schools of the Good ol’ USA is God and Jesus....and nothing else?? My God!!!

“How can an Object have a relation to no thing?”

....because “no-thing” IS a relation! A relation NECESSARILY associates a minimum of TWO nouns; i.e. the test object and its environment, understand?

There is no singular or absolute relation (it’s a contradiction).....and THAT’S WHY THERE IS NO ABSOLUTE TRUTH!

This is basic stuff....

PrestonDeath on November 15, 2012:

How can an Object have a relation to no thing? Define Relation for me!?

fatfist (author) on November 15, 2012:

Preston,

You obviously don't understand what a concept is. A concept is a RELATION. That's it!!!

I urge you to read and understand this article, otherwise you will not be able to have a coherent discussion with anybody on the issue of concepts.

https://discover.hubpages.com/education/The-Ontolo...

PrestonDeath on November 15, 2012:

"We understand all concepts because we define them." Define Concept in a way that accounts for action, event and space (no thing) that can be used consistently. You stated that "Space is a concept." How can no thing be a concept? Objects DO concepts, right? No Object DOES no thing and no thing does nothing! I only have to show that the statement "There is no truth" is a contradiction and so it's implication Truth = Opinion is false. I am not beholden to offer a better explanation or definition just because I've showed yours to be false. That's not how it works. That's not how it's ever worked.