The Truth is Objective?

[Nakosis]

Do you believe an objective truth exists.

If so, does anyone know what it is?

To me the truth is constantly changing. The truth is what exists in this exact moment of time. When that moment is gone, so is it's truth gone.

Our conscious awareness of truth is always of a truth which has already ceased to exist. By the time our brain registers the experience, it no longer exists.

Our delayed experience of what is, is as close as we can get to any truth, imo.

 

[JustGeorge]

I don't know. All I do know regarding this, is it doesn't really matter what I think, and thinking about it won't make any difference.

Therefore, I will go back to collecting recipes...

 

[Nakosis]

I don't know. All I do know regarding this, is it doesn't really matter what I think, and thinking about it won't make any difference.

Therefore, I will go back to collecting recipes...

Any good low carb vegetarian recipes?

One thing I liked about the Hare Krishna was the free vegetarian food.

 

[JustGeorge]

Any good low carb vegetarian recipes?

One thing I liked about the Hare Krishna was the free vegetarian food.

Hm. You know, I'm never exactly sure what is a carb, and what is not...

(You can tell I never went thought dietary route.)

 

[Link]

The intention behind our actions is our state. If we are looking at God and he is our goal, the intention and our state is to constantly see him and the power of his remembrance and light will grow.

What disconnects people from truth, is they prefer their desires of falsehood and don't seek God and his face, but rather their actions are for other then him.

The way to connect to truth, is to cut the arms of Satanic forces upon us, with the sword of God and help of God's forces and Angels. Everything becomes easy when you detect and split between the false energy and the energy and power from God.

If you can't recognize the sword of God and your own sword of honor, then, you should try to listen, for they both thunder in your soul telling you to pick them up and use them.

 

[74x12]

Do you believe an objective truth exists.

If so, does anyone know what it is?

To me the truth is constantly changing. The truth is what exists in this exact moment of time. When that moment is gone, so is it's truth gone.

Our conscious awareness of truth is always of a truth which has already ceased to exist. By the time our brain registers the experience, it no longer exists.

Our delayed experience of what is, is as close as we can get to any truth, imo.

Of course you're right that the present is all that really exists and everything is in transition. But even though everything is in transition yet we know that the present is at least founded upon the past. Meaning that even though all things are changing; they are actually trending rather than changing. Their future destination has already been suggested by the past. If you roll a bowling ball towards the pins. The ball is more likely to head in the general direction you rolled it. So even the future can often be predicted based on past trends. Whether you hit the pins or not is also more or less probable based on your skill level. So objective truth does exist even amidst all this constant change.

What I mean is ... someone could twist your words here to justify lying.

For example: The truth is always changing so I can make up things as I go along and that's "my truth". Nothing is solid after all. I can make up my own reality as I go along. Do you agree with me that that mindset is harmful?

 

[Kooky]

For example: The truth is always changing so I can make up things as I go along and that's "my truth". Nothing is solid after all. I can make up my own reality as I go along. Do you agree with me that that mindset is harmful?

It is no more harmful than the insinuation that one opinion among us is the objective truth, based on little more than naive empiricism ("I believe it when I see it").

 

[Nakosis]

Of course you're right that the present is all that really exists and everything is in transition. But even though everything is in transition yet we know that the present is at least founded upon the past. Meaning that even though all things are changing; they are actually trending rather than changing. Their future destination has already been suggested by the past. If you roll a bowling ball towards the pins. The ball is more likely to head in the general direction you rolled it. So even the future can often be predicted based on past trends. Whether you hit the pins or not is also more or less probable based on your skill level. So objective truth does exist even amidst all this constant change.

What I mean is ... someone could twist your words here to justify lying.

For example: The truth is always changing so I can make up things as I go along and that's "my truth". Nothing is solid after all. I can make up my own reality as I go along. Do you agree with me that that mindset is harmful?

If you are making things up, I'd think that'd be a clue you've crossed the line. At least to yourself.
Though I suppose it is possible for some do this without realizing it.

 

[Jack11]

No not anymore there's - your truth - my truth - his truth - her truth and sometimes we agree on the truth and even when we know the truth many will rally against the truth because its not their truth. We have flat Earthers Creationist and many other beliefs its their truth like it or not How do you change that?Even with evidence they will not see your truth.

Like Pilot said "What is truth?"

 

[blü 2]

Do you believe an objective truth exists.

If so, does anyone know what it is?

To me the truth is constantly changing. The truth is what exists in this exact moment of time. When that moment is gone, so is it's truth gone.

Our conscious awareness of truth is always of a truth which has already ceased to exist. By the time our brain registers the experience, it no longer exists.

Our delayed experience of what is, is as close as we can get to any truth, imo.

I use the so-called 'correspondence' definition of truth ─ that truth is a quality of statements and that a statement is true to the extent that it corresponds with / accurately represents objective reality.

'Objective reality' is the world external to the self, which we know about through our senses.

Since our understanding of that world changes, there are no absolute statements about reality, no absolute truths. Instead, what is correctly called true may change with time ─ it was once true that light propagated in the lumeniferous ether, for example, but now it's not.

 

[F1fan]

Do you believe an objective truth exists.

If you have a bad rash on your ***, and it won't let you sleep, you then know an objective truth exists.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Do you believe an objective truth exists.

If so, does anyone know what it is?

To me the truth is constantly changing. The truth is what exists in this exact moment of time. When that moment is gone, so is it's truth gone.

Our conscious awareness of truth is always of a truth which has already ceased to exist. By the time our brain registers the experience, it no longer exists.

Our delayed experience of what is, is as close as we can get to any truth, imo.

Well, I am with Kant on that one. Objective truth is the formal, abstract version of God without the personal traits. Both are unknowable it would appear.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

To me the truth is constantly changing. The truth is what exists in this exact moment of time. When that moment is gone, so is it's truth gone.

So does this mean that, as the moment you posted the above is now gone, it is no longer true? More broadly, if "the truth" is constantly changing, then so is the truth of "the truth is constantly changing".

In other words, if you claim that there is no objective truth (regardless of whether or not we are able to grasp it or even approach it), and instead that that which is "truth" or "the truth" is in constant flux, then it must be the case that this truth (that "the truth" itself is constantly changing) is in flux. Otherwise, it would be an objectively and permanent Truth, which of course would be in contradiction with its own claim.
Its a bit like claims of the sort "all generalizations are false" or "there are no objective facts" and so on. It seems prima facie self-defeating.

Our delayed experience of what is, is as close as we can get to any truth, imo.

So either the above isn't true, but the closest that your delayed experience allows you to get to what might be true in its place (if anything), or the above is in fact true, and therefore a truth that you have in fact reached, which makes the claim false.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

So does this mean that, as the moment you posted the above is now gone, it is no longer true? More broadly, if "the truth" is constantly changing, then so is the truth of "the truth is constantly changing".

In other words, if you claim that there is no objective truth (regardless of whether or not we are able to grasp it or even approach it), and instead that that which is "truth" or "the truth" is in constant flux, then it must be the case that this truth (that "the truth" itself is constantly changing) is in flux. Otherwise, it would be an objectively and permanent Truth, which of course would be in contradiction with its own claim.
Its a bit like claims of the sort "all generalizations are false" or "there are no objective facts" and so on. It seems prima facie self-defeating.


So either the above isn't true, but the closest that your delayed experience allows you to get to what might be true in its place (if anything), or the above is in fact true, and therefore a truth that you have in fact reached, which makes the claim false.

Well, we are in the la-la land of philosophy.
So far nobody in recorded history seems to have solved in the strong sense this one:
The rational, abstract, and methodical consideration of reality as a whole.

 

[PearlSeeker]

I use the so-called 'correspondence' definition of truth ─ that truth is a quality of statements and that a statement is true to the extent that it corresponds with / accurately represents objective reality.

'Objective reality' is the world external to the self, which we know about through our senses.

Since our understanding of that world changes, there are no absolute statements about reality, no absolute truths. Instead, what is correctly called true may change with time ─ it was once true that light propagated in the lumeniferous ether, for example, but now it's not.

Correspondence theory of truth - Wikipedia

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I use the so-called 'correspondence' definition of truth ─ that truth is a quality of statements and that a statement is true to the extent that it corresponds with / accurately represents objective reality.

'Objective reality' is the world external to the self, which we know about through our senses.

Since our understanding of that world changes, there are no absolute statements about reality, no absolute truths. Instead, what is correctly called true may change with time ─ it was once true that light propagated in the lumeniferous ether, for example, but now it's not.

The problem is that your definition of objective truth is in your mind and not a part of objective reality, so your definition is not real. We are playing a variant of logical positivism.

 

[blü 2]

The problem is that your definition of objective truth is in your mind and not a part of objective reality, so your definition is not real..

Yes, I'm speaking of the concept of 'truth', and concepts exist only as brain-states in individual brains.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Yes, I'm speaking of the concept of 'truth', and concepts exist only as brain-states in individual brains.

So how do I understand you, since your message moved through non brain-states not in individual brains?

 

[blü 2]

So how do I understand you, since your message moved through non brain-states not in individual brains?

You might explore the notion that individual humans can communicate their concepts to other humans ─ by speaking, by writing, by body language, and so on.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You might explore the notion that individual humans can communicate their concepts to other humans ─ by speaking, by writing, by body language, and so on.

How do the concept of concepts move through a physical world, if concepts are only brain states? How do I know that you are talking about concepts, because that leaves your brain-state and enters the physical world?