Is truth subjective or objective?

Frank Apisa wrote:

The truth is objective.

Perceptions of the truth are subjective.

REALITY is objective.

Perceptions of REALITY are subjective.

Try to keep the two separate.

2 points

a; thats a subjective opinion, making it opinion

b; your main point is opinion(look above), meaning thats your perception, aka.......

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

val, But how do you know that "all this" is not an illusion?

agreed

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

JLNobody wrote:
I didn't know Raheel was a theist.

Well...maybe he is not. I certainly do not know for sure.

But one of the things I have been questioning with Raheel is his (I'll stick with masculine pronouns unless Raheel tells me differently) statement that he is as certain of the exitence of God as he is of his own existence.

That can be interpreted in several ways...but considering the context (look back to the previous page)...it does appear he means to say that he is certain God exists.

That is the reason we are having this discussion, JL.

Quote:
I was siding with points he made that had nothing to do with religious belief.

I wasn't!

to clear up any misunderstandings...

i am a theist and i am a male- i am a muslim.

i agree with JL that you are confusing 'theories' with 'untested hypothesis' as some of your enteries seem to imply that my being certain of the existence of God is stupid as i said i have no reason to doubt it. why do you think i said this- i have questioned it, doubted it and that is how i have reached to the conclusion for the existence of God. of course if i ever come across any evidence to doubt it again i will. at this moment my 'guesses' seem correct but i will have to re-evaluate them if i have reason to do so. untill that time i have no reason to doubt my theories and that is why i see them as more than guesses.

0 Replies

Synopsis Psyche wrote:

Kristie wrote:
Truth is in perception. Since we all perceive things differently there can be no "one truth".

exactly what i was going to reply with when i saw the topic

"is it half full or...." would be a good simplistic example, there can't be a common consensus on this topic, and if there were, we would all be programmed (worse then some already are) robots, but then again i could be wrong, according to who's reading this

Nonsense.

The "truth" is the truth...no matter what anyone perceives about it.

If you are saying that we can all have different perceptions of the truth...say that.

We've been over and over this in this thread and others.

0 Replies

Synopsis Psyche wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
The truth is objective.

Perceptions of the truth are subjective.

REALITY is objective.

Perceptions of REALITY are subjective.

Try to keep the two separate.

2 points

a; thats a subjective opinion, making it opinion

Once again...nonsense.

BY DEFINITION...everything I've said is correct...and ojective.

Quote:

b; your main point is opinion(look above), meaning thats your perception, aka.......

Of course my opinions are subjective. Giving a definition is not giving an opinion.

0 Replies

raheel wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
JLNobody wrote:
I didn't know Raheel was a theist.

Well...maybe he is not. I certainly do not know for sure.

But one of the things I have been questioning with Raheel is his (I'll stick with masculine pronouns unless Raheel tells me differently) statement that he is as certain of the exitence of God as he is of his own existence.

That can be interpreted in several ways...but considering the context (look back to the previous page)...it does appear he means to say that he is certain God exists.

That is the reason we are having this discussion, JL.

Quote:
I was siding with points he made that had nothing to do with religious belief.

I wasn't!

to clear up any misunderstandings...

i am a theist and i am a male- i am a muslim.

i agree with JL that you are confusing 'theories' with 'untested hypothesis' as some of your enteries seem to imply that my being certain of the existence of God is stupid as i said i have no reason to doubt it. why do you think i said this- i have questioned it, doubted it and that is how i have reached to the conclusion for the existence of God. of course if i ever come across any evidence to doubt it again i will. at this moment my 'guesses' seem correct but i will have to re-evaluate them if i have reason to do so. untill that time i have no reason to doubt my theories and that is why i see them as more than guesses.

Do you KNOW there is a god, Raheel?

0 Replies

yes i do.

0 Replies

raheel wrote:

yes i do.

How do you know that?

0 Replies

like i said i've proved it to myself through logical thinking but i do not want to get into that too much. if you feel that God does not exist can i ask why. if you can give me a point for why God cannot exist i will see if i can prove to you that God can exist despite of it.

0 Replies

raheel wrote:

like i said i've proved it to myself through logical thinking but i do not want to get into that too much. if you feel that God does not exist can i ask why. if you can give me a point for why God cannot exist i will see if i can prove to you that God can exist despite of it.

1) I am an agnostic. I do not know if God is exists....I do not know if there are no gods....and I do not see anywhere near enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a guess in either direction.

2) You claim you have "proved" to yourself that a god exists through logical thinking.

I am very skeptical that you have done this...and I am guessing that you do not KNOW that god exists...but that you don't have the make-up to simply acknowledge that you do not know.

I think you are just guessing.

If you would like to discuss this...I am more than willing to do so. If you choose to avoid doing so...I will understand.

0 Replies

I think this discussion has gone off track...the
question is not about "The Truth" or justifying one's religion or lack of it....It is simply about truth.

I am surprised no lawyers have joined the discussion. Aren't trials an attempt to find the truth? Truth is often evidenced on a gut level......
"It has the ring of truth." " I could tell he wasn't
telling the truth."

By the way, welcome to A2K Raheel and
Synopsis Psyche!

0 Replies

shepaints wrote:

I think this discussion has gone off track...the
question is not about "The Truth" or justifying one's religion or lack of it....It is simply about truth.

I am surprised no lawyers have joined the discussion. Aren't trials an attempt to find the truth? Truth is often evidenced on a gut level......
"It has the ring of truth." " I could tell he wasn't
telling the truth."

By the way, welcome to A2K Raheel and
Synopsis Psyche!

Yer right, Shepaints. We have gotten off track. But to be honest...I've been part of these fora for 5 years now...and except for the very, very, very boring threads...every thread eventually gets off track.

I think everone involved has pretty much give his/her views on the original topic...and a bit of diversion is not entirely unwelcome.

Raheel is sharing his feelings...and I'm doing a bit of devil's advocacy.

Just having fun.

Hope you are too.

How's the painting going? :wink:

0 Replies

Frank, today I have more paint under my fingernails (blue and green) than on the canvas, but thanks for asking!

I would really like to hear from customs officers
re: is the truth subjective or objective?!

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

Synopsis Psyche wrote:
Kristie wrote:
Truth is in perception. Since we all perceive things differently there can be no "one truth".

exactly what i was going to reply with when i saw the topic

"is it half full or...." would be a good simplistic example, there can't be a common consensus on this topic, and if there were, we would all be programmed (worse then some already are) robots, but then again i could be wrong, according to who's reading this

Nonsense.

The "truth" is the truth...no matter what anyone perceives about it.

If you are saying that we can all have different perceptions of the truth...say that.

We've been over and over this in this thread and others.

example, a person can make any given thing the truth to themselves, even if its viewed by everyone else in the world as a singular truth unlike the one persons "truth" therefore, its not that one persons perception, its the one persons reality, so tell me exactly how the "truth is the truth...."

and yes, some things in the world are set in stone, and some people see it differently aka perception, but on a whole i don't agree with "the truth is the truth...."

thats your perspective of the truth, and as said, i don't agree, but i can respect your opinion

0 Replies

shepaints wrote:

By the way, welcome to A2K Raheel and
Synopsis Psyche!

thank you much, look forward to the conversations

0 Replies

Synopsis Psyche wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Synopsis Psyche wrote:
Kristie wrote:
Truth is in perception. Since we all perceive things differently there can be no "one truth".

exactly what i was going to reply with when i saw the topic

"is it half full or...." would be a good simplistic example, there can't be a common consensus on this topic, and if there were, we would all be programmed (worse then some already are) robots, but then again i could be wrong, according to who's reading this

Nonsense.

The "truth" is the truth...no matter what anyone perceives about it.

If you are saying that we can all have different perceptions of the truth...say that.

We've been over and over this in this thread and others.

example, a person can make any given thing the truth to themselves...

I agree. And what you have is a perception of the truth...not necessarily the truth.

The truth is the truth no matter what anyone does with it.

It is a definitional thing.

0 Replies

Frank, nonsense, full of shyt.
You're right. That behavior, as gross as it may seem, does feel good.

0 Replies

JLNobody wrote:

Frank, nonsense, full of shyt.
You're right. That behavior, as gross as it may seem, does feel good.

Good.

I'm glad you feel good.

Next time, I hope the remarks are made when you are correct instead of wrong.

0 Replies

But I thought I was never correct. Oh well, at least I try to be civil--most often.

0 Replies

Since this thread seems to be running round in circles heres a potentional circle for you Frank.

If as you say "truth is a definitional thing", and since all definitions rely on on words which themselves need defining, where do you go from there ?

You can't appeal to "facts" because you seem agree that "perception" filters them and "perception may be wrong". But what does "wrong" mean other than appeal to consensus ! The step taken by Husserl and other philosophers at this point is to say forget about "facts" ....all we will ever have is perception and its fickle allegience to vested interests, shared or otherwise. This leap is similar to the rejection of "the ether" in physics as an absolute frame of reference (which was Newtons vested interest). All becomes relative to the observer's vantage point and its associated (social) history.

Of course, to concede the point you might have to re-examine your own vested interest in the word "guess".... :wink:

0 Replies

Is truth subjective or objective?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know