Is truth relavtive?

[Lonnie]

I have heard some people say that truth is relative.
Do you argree that truth is relative?

I myself, do not think truth is relative.

 

[HouseApe]

Did you want to provide a working definition of truth for the thread?

 

[Spherical Time]

Did you want to provide a working definition of truth for the thread?

Well, since I think that any definition of truth is subjective, yes, I think that truth is relative.

 

[Code-Monkey]

I have heard some people say that truth is relative.
Do you argree that truth is relative?

I myself, do not think truth is relative.

Truth is not relative. Perspectives can be relative, but the fact that people have those perspectives is either true or not true.

 

[Spinrad]

Truth is just a term used to describe someone's percieved accuracy about a given circumstance. All terms are somewhat relative, I think. If the word truth is to be used to describe some transcendental accuracy that is independant of the observer, then it could be said to be non-relative. But when a person uses it to describe some aspect of reality they percieve it is relative.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Truth is not relative. Perspectives can be relative, but the fact that people have those perspectives is either true or not true.

Agreed.

 

[levi501]

Is the logic behind 2 + 2 = 4 a relative truth? I can't see how.
So while some truth is relative some isn't.. so I chose "No" for lack of a better option.

 

[Spinrad]

I wouldn't call that "truth" anyway. I would say that according to what we know - or how we define 2 and 4 that mathematical phrase is accurate. I would call it truth to say I cannot concieve of a way that the mathematical phrase above would be innaccurate.

 

[levi501]

I wouldn't call that "truth" anyway. I would say that according to what we know - or how we define 2 and 4 that mathematical phrase is accurate. I would call it truth to say I cannot concieve of a way that the mathematical phrase above would be innaccurate.

that's why I specified the logic behind it and not necessarily the equation.
I think mathmatical axioms fit the bill for truths that aren't relative.
In my opinion to doubt this is to enter into an espistemological discussion that borders on nihilism.

 

[Spinrad]

That's OK by me. Truth is a vague and easily misused term. I don't like it very much. Any time I hear the word truth used as a qualifier I automatically suspect the statement it is being used to qualify. Yes, even mathematically. I think that's why math is rarely qualified. It stands on it's own. I haven't ever heard anyone say 1+1 is truly 2, I guess is what I mean. No one really needs to question it. But when someone says that they saw something happen and or believe someothing happened and then try to demand that this is truth apart from their perceptions, they are full of it. They might be accurate in their statements, but they have no ability to judge them as true for anyone other than themselves.

 

[tcampen]

Truth is just a term used to describe someone's percieved accuracy about a given circumstance. All terms are somewhat relative, I think. If the word truth is to be used to describe some transcendental accuracy that is independant of the observer, then it could be said to be non-relative. But when a person uses it to describe some aspect of reality they percieve it is relative.

That's the best darn answer anyone could hope for. Well Done!

 

[Lonnie]

A reason why I think that truth is not relative, is because logicaly it is impossible for two contradicting truths to exist.

Example:
There is no God.
There is a God.
Could both these statements be true? Logicaly, no. If so, then prove it logicaly.

I think that too often people use truth, as they would belief.

 

[Spinrad]

I would agree, and I would add that anyone claiming to have "the truth" in regards to those two statements is either lying or stupid. One or the other is the accurate statement and no one can say which it is.

 

[Code-Monkey]

Anyone who tries to claim that truth must absolutely be relative is being illogical. Someone can claim that it might be relative, but they can't claim that it definitely is relative. As soon as they have done that, then they are defeating themselves with their own logic. Their own claim doesn't agree with itself.

If truth truly were relative, then that would be itself an absolute truth. Thus, some truth must exist in the absolute realm.

 

[Spinrad]

What about if someone said they can't think of a scenario where someone's "truth" claims can be shown to be accurate?

 

[PrometheusGrey]

I am personally of the opinion that truth does not exist, and is merely a human construct. Although mathematics is as well, it has proven applicable to the external world by all those who understand the rules of the idea, (1+1=2) while religious, social, and philosophical "truths" are ever changeing. In this sense, I view science as dealing with the concrete (in that it generally accurately describes the world of the observers) and reproducable, while "truth," despite its deffinition, exists as influenced by the believer.

Having never percieved any evidence for absolute truths, I shall abstain from believing them to exist.

 

[Lonnie]

Can the following contradicting statements be true?

1) There is no God. There is a God.

2) I have never eaten, and never will. I am always eating, and always will.

3) Truth is relative. Truth is not relative.

4) You believe truth is relative. You believe that truth is not relative.

5) You are exactly 6 feet tall. You are exactly 5 feet tall.

 

[HypnoToad]

truth does not exist

Is that true?

 

[David Gould]

I think Spinrad has it perfectly correct in this thread. The big problem is the definition of 'truth'.

My position is that there is a way the universe really operates. However, there is no way of ever telling if we have worked out what that way actually is.

 

[Code-Monkey]

I think Spinrad has it perfectly correct in this thread. The big problem is the definition of 'truth'.

My position is that there is a way the universe really operates. However, there is no way of ever telling if we have worked out what that way actually is.

Regardless of whether or not we can actually figure out the world (as if we were omniscient somehow), I think we can agree that it is in fact true that we believe it's a difficult task to understand the world. It's true that your username is David Gould, and mine Code-Monkey. These are absolute truths. So we can agree that at least some exist.