What is truth?

Torri wrote :
@Ding an Sich,
To the first question, using the scientific method.
Then one must ask if progress and "truth" are intertwined? Intuitively, without thinking thoroughly, the answer would be a yes, but on deeper thought, I'd have to lean towards no. Does modern science give us truth or a way to interpret events of nature?

The subject-object problem is a headache to clarify. Why is a human subject capable of interpreting the objectivity that is the world around them? Or how sure is a humans capability of interpreting the objects around them? A some-sort of transject mainframe from the perspective of a subject.

BHANU PADMO :
Identity of Truth (2).
Often, truths may seem intertwined. But they turn convergent in the long run.

Since the main ingredient for manufacture of primary truth in the form of subjective idea is perceptional memory, the contrivances that accelerate perception do play an important role in genesis of truth. If *science* is to be accredited for availability of newer and more efficient contrivances, that is fine. But it ought to be borne in mind that perceptional memories are secondary with respect to conceptualization that assembles the former into ideas. This primary truth-synthesizer viz. conceptualization doesn*t fall in the domain of science. Philosophy is the mother of truth when science is the utilitarian art.

The subject-object issue isn*t a problem when seen in right perspective. Every piece of existence (entity) has the primordial right to know itself and its surrounding. Thus subjectivity and objectivity are amalgamated into a two-in-one.

Interpreting objectivity needs no magic. It is spontaneous in view of given personal ability. The entity is very sure of interpreting the objectivity that surrounds it. What it feels about the objectivity is the *personal truth*, final for now and mutable thenceforth.

In view of the doctrine of primordial right, there is no need for proposing *transject mainframe* to explain a subject*s vicariousness (empathy). The stone sees.

Truth.....Another ethereal concept that will never be fully distinguishable from one outlook to the next.
One man's truth......... another man's lie.

yes relative truth unfortunately do not exist which is why existence is for freedom individual objective rights

what is true cant b else but also what is true is definitely present anywhere, therefore truth mean else rights knowing how it relatively exist

I have always figured that meanings of words are malleable over time, but the example in the video was very interesting. Language, similar to art, is ambiguous. I suppose almost everything in the world is a dynamic system, ever changing.

well then , lets define truth as what it takes to allow life to exist in the first place

such as enviroment , nutrients , a planet that can support life , Earth

this is a truth

now I defy anyone to refute this truth

a truth then is a understanding about fundamental reality that is beyond our existence , so as to make this fundamental existence based on OUR existence , false

Truth is determined destiny with space for free time

First of all that doesn't make sense, and second of all who determines destiny?

First of all, you "determined" the destiny of my reply, and second of all there is no answer

if there is no answer then there is no truth, truth is exclusively the absolute object fact which confirm how any is same reality objectively and which introduce freedom as the exclusive absolute value out of everything reality being true

u love to run for facts abuse in order to justify opposites as truth which is evil forces to unacceptable paradoxes reasons of absolute abstractions in objective definitions terms as existing facts instead of truth existence, bc u love to claim being a free value as a right out of truth, while knowing that u kill the truth for that loveable pretense

It is an accurate description of the extant state of affairs.





David

You still want to know what truth is ?

Woody Allen

Yes, it's a matter of claims: propositions about the actual state of affairs. But that is not what I mean by Reality--THAT is what actually is, not what I think is. As such, Reality is beyond conception even though it's what's happening.
Therefore when I'm greeted with "'Sup?" I answer with "Reality."

I can honestly say that truth is destined to what I hear at the time, and sometimes I disagree. I like the Woody Allen quote

how dare u claim that ur expression matter when it means the truth

u r proving my point, truth is that u r gonna to b burried alive

...you starting to sound like an Islamic extremist having a go on justifying your hate but all you can spit out is incoherent thoughts mate...

...and why on hell there must be a "who" to determine destiny ? from where does it follow from one argument to the other ?

...people have a hard time getting the difference between knowing what is true which they might not, the epistemic problem, and what is true being true, the ontological problem, which simply asserts that a world a reality is going on whatever we know or not know about it...countless times we can see the eternal miss confusion repeating endlessly throughout the forum...it seams like a recurrent curse going on...

...the reality of what you experience it is not beyond conception, but rather conception is what you have by experiencing it, a very objective fact in itself...whether "you" are in control of what you conceive or not is a matter of speculation, and I know you love to speculate about it don´t you J ? that is also a true fact...

Your diabolical English does not help your case, but in essence "intellectual freedom" involves the understanding that "truth" is often matter of social convention and common culture. That is why those who lay claim to "the Truth" (capital T) are often doomed to infantile and pernicious religious strife. Their fall-back position of selective reference to so-called "Holy Books" is merely a psychological palliative which rationalizes their social conditioning. In short, YOU are the one "in prison".