[Waves]

Originally Posted by snapshot

It doesn't matter. I'd like to know your method for determining truth from falsehood.

This is sort of important since my whole post hinges on a different definition of truth than most people use. My belief is that truth is relative, like everything else. Every person has their own set of truths that form their beliefs, which dictates their thoughts and behavior. I dont like to talk about truth in terms of objective accuracy or "what really happens" because i believe to humans, "what really happens" is irrelevant, we act on our desires and those are rooted in subjective motives which are not always based in logic. What is your desire for seeking truth for instance? Is it simply because you want to be accurate? Why is it that you can have a desire to seek truth and be accurate and i can have a desire to be a lunatic and totally disregard what most people consider to be true? What is your desire for seeking women? For conversing on a message board? Everyone has different motivations and reasons and these are the subjective actions, or attractions, that rule our behavior.

For me, truth is my beliefs, its my perception, and it has nothing to do with objectivity. So it might be hard to debate some of this stuff. But im definitly willing to go there. truth to me are the beliefs that we hold which set the foundation for our experience. They are the ones that we dont question, that we simply believe to be true because that is what we have been taught OR that is what we have experience through our senses. Our mental truths.

For instance, you could put forth a lot of opinions, but the implication of opinion is that you have no real reason for putting it forth other than it's just kind of a feeling that you have.

As i stated before, i believe true debate should be much more akin to an exploration of ideas and a sharing of ideas, not a comparison or an argument. I believe in variety, i believe if we all held the same beliefs and believed the same stuff to be true and held the same desires we would end up like clones. To further the variety in experience that we can explore, variety in beliefs is key, because our subjective motivations are very much linked to our objective beliefs.

So to me the implication of opinion is just sharing. Having fun, discussing, and exploring mental concepts. If you agree, great. If you dont, thats fine too.

Like, I could have a feeling that objective reality doesn't exist, but I'd have to accept that it did exist in order to be able to prove that it didn't, so that would contradict. I could have a feeling that the Orioles were going to lose tonight and say "The Orioles are going to lose tonight," but that's just an opinion with no reasoning behind it whatsoever--it's a baseless assertion, but I'm not making a contradiction.

Well then we would discuss your feelings and we would eventually get to the fact that you are making baseless assertations. After exploring your beliefs we would eventually get to this fact and i would go "great- but i dont agree with your baseless assertations" and that would be that. Its not that i dont think we cant come to conclusions and concern falsity from truth, its just that i believe truth is relative from person to person and thus the conclusions are going to be different from person to person. which in reality is how it should be, imo.

There are certain words that I don't think you should (or even could) use if you don't accept objective standards, if you don't accept that you can discover truths outside of yourself.

I do believe you can discover truth outside of yourself. Its just that its not anyone else's job to tell you what belief is right for you. I think all beliefs are equally valid and can be validated by a persons perception because thats what beliefs are designed to do, regardless of the fact that they are not rooted in objective truth and logic. i do not believe reality to be rooted in objective truth or logic as i explained above, and that includes our human realities. and when i say this i am talking about beliefs as real, objective things. beliefs are real, and you can see that reality in extremes in places like the middle east. people are not killing themselves for things they believe to be false. thats the nature of beliefs and human perception.

Words like "truth" are overtaken by words like "opinion." To me there is a difference between a truth and To say something is "true for you" is to say that it's your opinion, and negating the value of the word "truth." We don't need a word like truth since its very existence implies objectivity. Without objectivity, the word "truth" would never even have come into existence. But people do believe and act as though we can come to objective conclusions about the nature of reality--they use the word "truth" and they make positive claims about reality. Yes, we have subjective experience, but those subjective experiences are able to come to objective conclusions that, no matter how much our beliefs differ, won't change the fabric of reality (which we can test using the scientific method).

The fabric of reality is irrelevant to humans. What is relevant to us is ourselves and our perception of reality. And how we view reality is our reality and its real to us. So our beliefs are our reality. They might not be THE reality, they might not be TRUE, but they are our reality. I agree we can come to objective conclusions but these objective conclusions are subjective in nature given that they are done with subjective perceptions. For all we know there might be an infinity number of different universes all with their own laws of physics and reality. That would mean that our reality is just one configuration of energy, one result among an infinity and our objective conclusions only apply to us and our perceptions and our universe.

Im getting hypothetical i know, but my point is that its useless to try to make objective conclusions about reality in any kind of concrete way. All you can do is draw similarities just like two scientists can never make the same measurement twice. We live in a similar reality. We see things similarly. We do things similarly. But not the exact same. Its the variety in subjective motivation that makes humans what we are, and whether or not that subjective motivation is rooted in any kind of objective truth or logic is irrelevant.

/endrant

So, what I'd like to see from everyone who is skeptical about making claims about objective truths is for none of them to use words like "truth" and not make any positive claims except about themselves or their perceptions.

Which is all any human can do, EVER.

If you ever make a claim to which the question "Is that true for me as well as you?" with an affirmative answer, then you're making a positive claim about the nature of reality, which contradicts the philosophy being put forth when it's claimed that no objective truths can be reached.

I agree. Doesnt mean we arent free to explore and share together.