Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

What Is The "Truth"?

Mudcat

By Mudcat
in General Discussions

Recommended Posts

Mudcat Mentor

Mudcat

Posted
Posted

A conversation on an unrelated forum got me thinking about this.

On all sides of the aisle, truth claims are posited, critically examined and so forth.

Propositions like: The Book of Mormon is true, or God does/doesn't exist, or JS was/wasn't a martyr and so forth are made quite often. My hope in this thread is not to discuss one particular claim over another, but rather what a person actually means when they posit something as truth.

So I have a few questions.

When you say or infer that something is "true", what do you actually mean?

Given claims like, "What is true for me may not be true for you." Do different types of truth exist? If so what do you think they are?

Or do you think that there is or should be a unified definition of what truth is? If so what do you think such a definition would be?

I dunno, how much interest this thread will generate, but I thought I would submit it as it is something that interests me.

Discourse and debate are certainly welcomed.

Respectfully,

Mudcat

erichard Community Regular

erichard

Posted
Posted

...

When you say or infer that something is "true", what do you actually mean?

...

200px-What-is-truth02.jpg

: According to Jesus, as we find it written in John 18:37, Jesus thus describes his mission: "
came into the world ... to bear witness to the
truth
; and all who are on the side of truth listen to [my] voice", to which Pilate famously replied, "
What is truth
?" (John 18:38)...

Mudcat, Truth is what all those who have the truth agree is the truth. Jesus for one.

If some guy at the local bar says, "those who think they know the truth bother those of us who know we have the truth!" Well, this guy may talk big, but he still may not have the truth.

Richard

thesometimesaint Grand Master

thesometimesaint

Posted
Posted (edited)

Mudcat:

If you want facts go to the science department of your local university. If you want "truth" your local church, mosque, synagogue, Hindu temple is the place.

Edited by thesometimesaint
ERayR Grand Master

ERayR

Posted
Posted

Mudcat I don't have the time right now to work on all of it but let offer my thoughts on this part.

Given claims like, "What is true for me may not be true for you." Do different types of truth exist? If so what do you think they are?

I don't think of it as different kinds of truth but more the application of truth. If I say blood pressure medicine is a good thing and try to apply it universally it doesn't fit. For me, as one who needs blood presure medication, it is truth while it may not be for you. I am sure if I were to take time I could find some LDS things that are valid for one who chooses to live LDS but may not be for one who chooses to live otherwise.

altersteve Grand Master

altersteve

Posted
Posted (edited)

Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. All truth ultimately points to Him.

Edited by altersteve
1
zerinus Grand Master

zerinus

Posted
Posted

A conversation on an unrelated forum got me thinking about this.

On all sides of the aisle, truth claims are posited, critically examined and so forth.

Propositions like: The Book of Mormon is true, or God does/doesn't exist, or JS was/wasn't a martyr and so forth are made quite often. My hope in this thread is not to discuss one particular claim over another, but rather what a person actually means when they posit something as truth.

So I have a few questions.

When you say or infer that something is "true", what do you actually mean?

Given claims like, "What is true for me may not be true for you." Do different types of truth exist? If so what do you think they are?

Or do you think that there is or should be a unified definition of what truth is? If so what do you think such a definition would be?

I dunno, how much interest this thread will generate, but I thought I would submit it as it is something that interests me.

Discourse and debate are certainly welcomed.

Respectfully,

Mudcat

"And truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come;"
(D&C 93:24.)

mfbukowski Grand Master

mfbukowski

Posted
Posted (edited)

There are many time-tested theories; here is a start:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth

Contents

[hide]

I vote for 2.15- Pragmatism.

But it depends on what works for you. ;)

Edited by mfbukowski
2
elguanteloko Proficient

elguanteloko

Posted
Posted

When you say or infer that something is "true", what do you actually mean?

I mean by that something that is the case, regardless of whether we are able to get to it or not and whether we are able to recognize it when we get to it or not.

Given claims like, "What is true for me may not be true for you." Do different types of truth exist? If so what do you think they are?

Well, these are the more informal ones. "Truth" may simply be "what you are VERY convinced of" or, "I see it this way".

Or do you think that there is or should be a unified definition of what truth is? If so what do you think such a definition would be?

No, it's pretty useful to have different uses for the same words and similar uses for different words. These are often mixed so one should be conscious of the context you are bringing the word from and the context in which the other individual(s) may be bringing it from.

Storm Rider Grand Master

Storm Rider

Posted
Posted

A conversation on an unrelated forum got me thinking about this.

On all sides of the aisle, truth claims are posited, critically examined and so forth.

Propositions like: The Book of Mormon is true, or God does/doesn't exist, or JS was/wasn't a martyr and so forth are made quite often. My hope in this thread is not to discuss one particular claim over another, but rather what a person actually means when they posit something as truth.

So I have a few questions.

When you say or infer that something is "true", what do you actually mean?

Given claims like, "What is true for me may not be true for you." Do different types of truth exist? If so what do you think they are?

Or do you think that there is or should be a unified definition of what truth is? If so what do you think such a definition would be?

I dunno, how much interest this thread will generate, but I thought I would submit it as it is something that interests me.

Discourse and debate are certainly welcomed.

Respectfully,

Mudcat

What is truth has been a question of the ages. In my feeble mind I approach it in a simple manner: 1) there are few absolute truths, 2) absolute truths are not relative, 3) absolute truths have no perspective, 4) absolute truths are eternal. An absolute truth for me is that Jesus is the Son of God, was born of the virgin Mary, lived a perfect life, was crucified for the sins of mankind, rose again the third day, taught the spirits in prison, sits on the right hand of the Father, and will return again one day. It does not matter if anyone believes this, it remains true and will always be true.

Facts can be argued from point of view. Was Joseph Smith martyr? It depends on who is making the claim and why. Some are adamant that a martyr cannot defend his life or those that surround him; that he must die passively. Others define a martyr as one who dies for a purpose and does not deny that purpose in their death. Definitions become vital to the conversation. This is a quick summary, but I hope one is able to get the gist of my thinking.

Cobalt-70 Grand Master

Cobalt-70

Posted
Posted

When you say or infer that something is "true", what do you actually mean?

Given claims like, "What is true for me may not be true for you." Do different types of truth exist? If so what do you think they are?

Or do you think that there is or should be a unified definition of what truth is? If so what do you think such a definition would be?

Truth is a sentence that wields political power. Let me explain what I mean by that:

First of all, the only things that are true or false are sentences. A car cannot be true. A sidewalk cannot be true. We say that "the Book of Mormon is true," but that is only shorthand for something like "the Book of Mormon is the word of God," or "the statements in the Book of Mormon are true." We might say that "the Church is true," but we mean something like that "the Church is the only authorized or legitimate church." Second, if the only things that can be true are sentences, that means that language is the mediator between us and truth. We do not have direct access to truth, except via language. We may "feel the Spirit," for example, but merely feeling the Spirit is not truth. Rather, truth is the sentences we form after we feel the Spirit, to describe what we have felt. Or it might be sentences we form or hear about prior to feeling the Spirit, which the Spirit somehow reinforces. If you replace "feel the Spirit" with "perform a scientific experiment" in the above sentences, the same holds true.

What distinguishes a "true" sentence from a "false" sentence is the political imprimatur that a society has placed upon it. "Truth" is a currency by which people get other people to think what they want them to think, and do what they want them to do. People only use the word "true" if they want to exercise power over someone else, or (equivalently) if they want others to submit to a higher power. For example, if you are a scientist, you tell people that the statements in your scientific theory are "true" because you want to make other people repeat (or think about) the statements of that theory with the imprimatur of truth. You want them to do something, and you use "truth" as a currency to get them to do your bidding. The only reason you would ever tell someone that a statement in the Book of Mormon is "true" is if you wanted them to think the way that you do. Thus, "truth" is at least a way to exercise "micro"-political power, and it is an important part of what makes us social animals. It is also the primary currency through which large-scale political power is wielded. Peasants subject themselves to kings and dictators because of truth, and they also rise up in revolution because of truth. Political parties are primarily about defining and disseminating "truth". Conflict occurs between different political parties not because one cares more about "truth" than the other, but because the two parties wield the power of "truth" using different and incompatible languages.

CV75 Grand Master

CV75

Posted
Posted

When you say or infer that something is "true", what do you actually mean?

Given claims like, "What is true for me may not be true for you."

When you say or infer that something is "true", what do you actually mean?: That the qualified object or principle of discussion originated from, and is still aligned with, God.

Given claims like, "What is true for me may not be true for you.": What is true under one set of qualifications may not be true under another set.

Sometimes I am more casual and "true" means "true enough" and "What is true for me may not be true for you" means "Whatever floats your boat."

Gervin Mentor

Gervin

Posted
Posted

Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. All truth ultimately points to Him.

If Christ is the Truth then all truth ultimately flows from him, but I understand yer point.

Bill “Papa” Lee Grand Master

Bill “Papa” Lee

Posted
Posted

A conversation on an unrelated forum got me thinking about this.

On all sides of the aisle, truth claims are posited, critically examined and so forth.

Propositions like: The Book of Mormon is true, or God does/doesn't exist, or JS was/wasn't a martyr and so forth are made quite often. My hope in this thread is not to discuss one particular claim over another, but rather what a person actually means when they posit something as truth.

So I have a few questions.

When you say or infer that something is "true", what do you actually mean?

Given claims like, "What is true for me may not be true for you." Do different types of truth exist? If so what do you think they are?

Or do you think that there is or should be a unified definition of what truth is? If so what do you think such a definition would be?

I dunno, how much interest this thread will generate, but I thought I would submit it as it is something that interests me.

Discourse and debate are certainly welcomed.

Respectfully,

Mudcat

I often wonder if there is any…then I realize God is Truth and I am just blinded to it by the cares of the world, or anger, or my broken toe at the moment, while wearing steel-toe-shoes. Oh the cares of the human existence… :sorry:

Bill “Papa” Lee Grand Master

Bill “Papa” Lee

Posted
Posted

what I have noticed is "truth" is relative to the situation at hand and the agenda promoted.

Then there is none, it either is or is not. Truth is not ‘relative”. It cannot be and be truth.

Mudcat Mentor

Mudcat

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks all for you thoughts so far.

Hi Bukowski,

There are many time-tested theories; here is a start:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth

I vote for 2.15- Pragmatism.

But it depends on what works for you. ;)

I have seen this article before. I dunno what sort of theory of truth I actually fit into.

In general, I think the a person who asserts something to be true, is essentially saying that the person feels they have received enough evidence on the matter to satisfy their needs, so that they are able to accept such as a fact.

That said,I do think there are different kinds of truth.

I think there is an objective sort of truth. Things like, the sky appears blue generally, or 2+3=5, or gold bars don't seem to float in water.. things that are mutually accepted, objectively testable and falsifiable by all.

I also think there is subjective sort of truth. Things like, God does/doesn't exist, I have a testimony of Christ, or my best color is green, or Tabbies make the best cats, and so on. These things don't seem to testable in any objective fashion and for the most part aren't falsifiable either. Yet on an individual basis, these things seem to hold a truth value to the individual.

There are also seems to be another sort of truth, that lends itself to simply accept the claims of others as fact. An apathetic sort of truth, that we all seem to embrace on some level. Accepting the results of the research of the scientific community, without bothering to examine the research itself comes to mind. I don't know what you would call that.

I think a curiosity about what I term as objective truth, is that it isn't always the case. In example, at one point in history the concept that the Earth was flat seemed objectively true, though this isn't the case now. IMO, there seems a great deal of fluidity to the term, I think for the most part it simply means "I believe this".

Regards,

Mudcat

LeSellers Veteran

LeSellers

Posted
Posted
Truth is that which is asserted by the person at the other end of the gun barrel.

So, when I point a gun at you, you, being at the other end of the barrel, are the source of truth?

Doesn't seem obvious.

Lehi

Mudcat Mentor

Mudcat

Posted
  • Author
Posted

So, when I point a gun at you, you, being at the other end of the barrel, are the source of truth?

Doesn't seem obvious.

Lehi

If the truth you were looking for was "I do."

Well we would call that a true Southern wedding.

Nathair/|\ Mentor

Nathair/|\

Posted
Posted

Every time i see the title of this thread i hear the hymnOh Say What is Truth in my head. :)

You beat me to it. Here are the words.

Oh Say, What Is Truth?

John Jaques line_des.gif

Oh say, what is truth? 'Tis the fairest gem

That the riches of worlds can produce,

And priceless the value of truth will be when

The proud monarch's costliest diadem

Is counted but dross and refuse.

Yes, say, what is truth? 'Tis the brightest prize

To which mortals or Gods can aspire;

Go search in the depths where it glittering lies

Or ascend in pursuit to the loftiest skies.

'Tis an aim for the noblest desire.

The sceptre may fall from the despot's grasp

When with winds of stern justice he copes,

But the pillar of truth will endure to the last,

And its firm-rooted bulwarks outstand the rude blast,

And the wreck of the fell tyrant's hopes.

Then say, what is truth? 'Tis the last and the first,

For the limits of time it steps o'er.

Though the heavens depart and the earth's fountains burst,

Truth, the sum of existence, will weather the worst,

Eternal, unchanged, evermore.

LeSellers Veteran

LeSellers

Posted
Posted (edited)

If the truth you were looking for was "I do."

Well we would call that a true Southern wedding.

Wish there were more of them. Fathers today don't have the guts (or the shotguns) to enforce a "you break it, you buy it" regime with regards to their daughters and grandchildren.

And that's the truth. Alas!!!

Lehi

Edited by LeSellers
Ahab Grand Master

Ahab

Posted
Posted (edited)

When you say or infer that something is "true", what do you actually mean?

I mean it is real or consistent with reality, as things actually are, or were, or will be.

For example, when I say the Book of Mormon is true I mean the Book of Mormon is what it claims to be. It's not only something real which you can handle in reality, but the content of the book is also consistent with reality and it was written by the real people who claimed to be writing the book.

Given claims like, "What is true for me may not be true for you." Do different types of truth exist? If so what do you think they are?

Substitute the word "reality" and see if you can catch a different sense of what someone is trying to say:

What is "reality" for me may not be "reality" for you. Do different types of reality exist? If so what do you think they are?

Some people think things are true, or real, when in reality those things exist only in their mind or imagination or maybe in the form of a book or a movie.

But does the fact that someone has an idea in their mind mean that what they think is not real? Why should that be? (another take on a question Professor Dumbledorf was asking Harry Potter)

Or do you think that there is or should be a unified definition of what truth is? If so what do you think such a definition would be?

Truth is as things are, or were, or will be, rather than only what someone thinks is true when in reality it never has existed and never will.

Harry Potter is a "real" movie and it tells a "real" story, in the sense that it's either really a fiction or non-fiction story, but does or did Harry Potter exist in reality or was that only an interesting story that somebody made up which some people enjoy imagining along with the author of the story?

Edited by Ahab
1
mfbukowski Grand Master

mfbukowski

Posted
Posted

Thanks all for you thoughts so far.

Hi Bukowski,

I have seen this article before. I dunno what sort of theory of truth I actually fit into.

In general, I think the a person who asserts something to be true, is essentially saying that the person feels they have received enough evidence on the matter to satisfy their needs, so that they are able to accept such as a fact.

That said,I do think there are different kinds of truth.

I think there is an objective sort of truth. Things like, the sky appears blue generally, or 2+3=5, or gold bars don't seem to float in water.. things that are mutually accepted, objectively testable and falsifiable by all.

I also think there is subjective sort of truth. Things like, God does/doesn't exist, I have a testimony of Christ, or my best color is green, or Tabbies make the best cats, and so on. These things don't seem to testable in any objective fashion and for the most part aren't falsifiable either. Yet on an individual basis, these things seem to hold a truth value to the individual.

There are also seems to be another sort of truth, that lends itself to simply accept the claims of others as fact. An apathetic sort of truth, that we all seem to embrace on some level. Accepting the results of the research of the scientific community, without bothering to examine the research itself comes to mind. I don't know what you would call that.

I think a curiosity about what I term as objective truth, is that it isn't always the case. In example, at one point in history the concept that the Earth was flat seemed objectively true, though this isn't the case now. IMO, there seems a great deal of fluidity to the term, I think for the most part it simply means "I believe this".

Regards,

Mudcat

I think I pretty much agree with this, I might have put some of it differently, but overall I think we agree.

Pragmatism looks at truth as always applying to a specific problem or project, and as a tool that fixes the problem it is applied to. For a long time, the "earth is flat" served perfectly well, until ships started disappearing over the horizon, and then the sailors came back and it was clear that they really hadn't fallen off the edge. Some other model was necessary, and a spherical model "worked" better- yet of course the earth was still the center of the universe- until that didn't "work" any more.

Now we have quantum mechanics, string theory etc all pushing the envelopes of what "works"- but we still haven't found a "theory of everything" that puts it all together. So what does this kind of truth have in common with subjective truth?

What do physical models have in common with the "truth" that Jesus is the Christ and God exists?

They actually do have something in common, and that again is that all of these propositions "work"- for subjective truths, they give our lives meaning, and "objective" truths make it possible to do things in the world

These are two completely different spheres, and mixing them leads to incredible misunderstandings about the nature of the world- statements about what "works" to give my life meaning have absolutely nothing to do with what "works" to get your car fixed, or scientific statements.

Yet people persist in mixing them, looking for God with a telescope, or looking for science to give them a reason to get up in the morning. But what what we call "truths" in each of these two spheres DO have in common is the fact that they "work" and perform the function that we have designed them for; in both cases they are tools to enable us to wrap our minds around practical problems in our lives and create a coherent world view to structure the chaos of experience.

In short, true statements allow us to make sense out of the world. For me, that is what "truth" is. It is a statement which allows me to see myself in relation to the world in a coherent way

bluebell Grand Master

bluebell

Posted
Posted

Wish there were more of them. Fathers today don't have the guts (or the shotguns) to enforce a "you break it, you buy it" regime with regards to their daughters and grandchildren.

And that's the truth. Alas!!!

Lehi

Thank goodness for their daughters that they don't. I can't think of much worse than being forced to marry a man that didn't want you or your baby.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...