Would the truth be boring as hell?

Your post remings me of the hitchikers guide to the galaxy. In the book the earth is a supercomputer designed to find the ultimate question of truth. (they already have the answer: 42). Anyway, the earth is destroyed seconds before it completes its mission, and it turns out it was the philosophers who did it. They called it protecting their occupation...

I do not think the truth would be boring as hell. But I do not think it is possible for a human being to understand the truth anyway, before it realizes some of the smaller truths that are so easily available to us. But most of us seem content with burying ourselves in ignorance and material pleasure. We are are slaves of our creation, and slaves cannot learn the truth and still be slaves. So to learn the truth we must first want our freedom.

Re: Would the truth be boring as hell?
TTF

I don't believe in any truth that stays there, in what you would call "the objective world".

See Descartes. When he says "je pense", the "je" implies the other, the different. He has admitted hall things already.
I prefer Nietzsche version: "There are thoughts".
Truth is a quest without an object. That is perhaps the best defnition of philosophy.

there are facts and there is evidence , all else is masturbation. ME

Spoken like a true man of science. An example from my work day yesterday...the fact was, I received a lovely e-mail from a client regarding a sushi quote, which mentioned that they had looked at the proposal, and their choices were highlighted in blue. However, the evidence was missing, as they neglected to include the attachment.

Regarding your comment on the truth being boring, sometimes, there is Zen and Satori to be found in the mundane day-to-day aspects of life, should one be willing to slow down a touch and 'see'.

The search for 'truth', in the philosophical sense, is an exercise in futility. Not that I mind indulging that urge once in a while, just for fun, like masturbation.

Cav:

I can't see searching for truth being merely masturbation. The past history of philosophy doesn't bear that to be true.

Math was once a philosophy, physical science was once a philosophy, physics was once a philosophy - unless you think that we have figured out all we can and the rest is simply up for debate.

I think that is either egotistical or pessimistic - I can't tell.

TTF

I'm pretty much a Taoist really, TTF. I just call it like I see it, with no ill will towards anyone, or anything. To me, truth is found in walking between raindrops.

I also think you may be confusing 'philosophy' with 'theory', regarding math and science.

When does a theory leave philosophy? Philosophy does not have 'theory;?

Are you saying there is another branch of inquiry out there called 'theory'.

I think 'theory' is just philosophy that happened to be right. Thus called science.

TTF

Hmm, interesting points. I equate the actual development of philosophy as 'query' and the development of science and math as 'theory'. The difference here is a matter of research, rather than conjecture. I'm not on any side, just trying to define things.