truth

given that there is truth beyond humans, as evidenced by the fact that prior to humans being on this planet we see organized patterns that we can equate with truth, for instance, the laws of motion.

How then can "truth" be born with the human race, be born with an individual?

Must not truth lay outside the human condition?

Or is truth a growing thing, as panendeists who believe that God and the universe are evolving together might conjecture. So back when life first got its foothold then truth was still mostly physical and not moral, since there were few if any conscious decisions that could be made.

Or does it even matter if Aaron's panendeistic view is right that truth may be evolving, or that Paine's and Helium's view that truth is truth, always was, is today, and always will be.

But we all know where we want truth to go, though don't we?

So if we kinda know where it should be goin, then maybe truth was always there?

Helium wrote:

given that there is truth beyond humans, as evidenced by the fact that prior to humans being on this planet we see organized patterns that we can equate with truth, for instance, the laws of motion.

Truth is not a thing in itself anymore than false is a thing in itself. Truth is simply a fact that can be verified. It's a subjective concept. It is believed to be truthful that "things" or "facts" existed before humanity, but that doesn't mean that "facts that could be verified" existed before humanity. Afterall, who would be there to verify them?

Helium wrote:

How then can "truth" be born with the human race, be born with an individual?

Truth was born with the ability for a subject(s) to verify the facts of another subject(s) or object(s).

Helium wrote:

Must not truth lay outside the human condition?

Reality lays outside the human condition. Truth is dependent on both the human condition and what lays beyond it.

Helium wrote:

Or is truth a growing thing, as panendeists who believe that God and the universe are evolving together might conjecture. So back when life first got its foothold then truth was still mostly physical and not moral, since there were few if any conscious decisions that could be made.

Truth is dependent upon our ability to understand and verify reality. It's not reality in itself. Therefore as our understanding of reality changes and grows so does truth.

Aaron wrote:

Quote :

Truth is not a thing in itself anymore than false is a thing in itself. Truth is simply a fact that can be verified.

Reality is merely the objective quality of Truth, and objective Truth is indeed a whole thing unto itself and is a the sum of all the objective facts in the universe. The objective existence of an oxygen atom in my lung is one of those objective facts or truths. Lies and falsehoods are merely human constructs that are the absence of Truth--they don't exist beyond our minds.

Quote :

It is believed to be truthful that "things" or "facts" existed before humanity, but that doesn't mean that "facts that could be verified" existed before humanity. Afterall, who would be there to verify them?

We would and have. We've been doing it for hundreds of years with a very primitive instrument called a telescope. We can look back along an unbroken string of evidence from one Planck Unit beyond our eyes, to billions of years ago, even to when the universe's bell was rung at the Big Bang.

The only other possibility is that this is all God's imagination or rendering, or that of one individual's--in which case it would have to be me.

Aaron,

You wrote: "Truth is simply a fact that can be verified. It's a subjective concept."

Could you clarify this a bit, as in my mind, at least, it feels contradictory. This is the crux of the debate that goes on nearly continually on our other site, as to the veracity of any given thing. Verified how?

Thanks,
Karen

Good question Karen. Perhaps I'll have to start a new thread on that.

What I call "truth" is just an idea that is logically consistent, compatible with what I see in the world, and testable because it makes predictions that can be verified empirically. But this kind of "truth" is not certain because I have know way of knowing that just because I have always seen things behave one way in the past they behave that way in the future.

To me there there is only one certain truth without quotation marks around it. And that is I exist. Everything else is just conjecture based on the best evidence available to me at the time.

stretmediq wrote:

What I call "truth" is just an idea that is logically consistent, compatible with what I see in the world, and testable because it makes predictions that can be verified empirically. But this kind of "truth" is not certain because I have know way of knowing that just because I have always seen things behave one way in the past they behave that way in the future.

To me there there is only one certain truth without quotation marks around it. And that is I exist. Everything else is just conjecture based on the best evidence available to me at the time.

Outstanding definitition!

I try to use the phrase "my truth" as often as I can remember to do so. I've gotten into some unfortunate conversations with people who claim to have the "100% irrefutable truth".

May I post this on another site without your name?

Karen

Sigh.

SpiritInfuses wrote:

stretmediq wrote:

What I call "truth" is just an idea that is logically consistent, compatible with what I see in the world, and testable because it makes predictions that can be verified empirically. But this kind of "truth" is not certain because I have know way of knowing that just because I have always seen things behave one way in the past they behave that way in the future.

To me there there is only one certain truth without quotation marks around it. And that is I exist. Everything else is just conjecture based on the best evidence available to me at the time.

Outstanding definitition!

I try to use the phrase "my truth" as often as I can remember to do so. I've gotten into some unfortunate conversations with people who claim to have the "100% irrefutable truth".

May I post this on another site without your name?

Karen

Be my guest!

Quote :

Sigh.

Again I have to agree with Paineful. I assume he was commenting on Stret's post.

And yeah gravity might not work tomorrow.

But ya know, if ya wanna lay odds on it, Stret, PM me a bet, an' I'll PM ya some pretty good odds. In fact if you won you'd be the richest person on earth.

Of course, that's assuming that our computer will work tomorrow, that our internet will work tomorrow.

That the sun will in fact rise.

Some how I think they all will.

Helium wrote:

Quote :

Sigh.

Again I have to agree with Paineful. I assume he was commenting on Stret's post.

And yeah gravity might not work tomorrow.

But ya know, if ya wanna lay odds on it, Stret, PM me a bet, an' I'll PM ya some pretty good odds. In fact if you won you'd be the richest person on earth.

Of course, that's assuming that our computer will work tomorrow, that our internet will work tomorrow.

That the sun will in fact rise.

Some how I think they all will.

Oh I think they will too so I'll pass on the bet. But there's a big difference between thinking and knowing. And if I knew what was going to happen tomorrow I wouldn't need to make bets to get rich!

Oh I think they will too ...

But there is no truth to the information????

If there is no truth to the information, does that, then, make it false?