Can you answer the question?

Thus far, there is little evidence that you even want to really communicate.

What would it take for that claim to be true?

The answer is irrelevant since the claims are simply my own impressions and opinions.

The topic is truth. The question gets directly to the heart of the matter at hand.

What would it take for those claims to be true?

Opinions are just opinions.

what is considered 'true' is irrelevant. It's just an opinion.

I did not ask what was considered true. I asked what it would take for those claims to be true.

If they are true, they are true.

Is there a hearing/reading issue at hand? Of course if they are true then they are true. That is not what I asked.

What would it take for those claim to be true?

I don't know. You tell me.

Fri 07/22/11 01:29 PM

What would it take for the above claim to be true?

What is the difference between a true belief and a false belief?

So we have witnessed two logical consequences of holding that truth is subjective. One led to admitting to not knowing what makes their claims true, and the other admitted to not believing that their own thoughts were true.

What better reason can we find to know that holding that truth is subjective leads to unintelligible nonsense?

So now do you feel like you have made your point?

Turns out your point is just an opinion.

Yes.

So many times in these threads the 'semantics' card is played. A single word can have meanings that can totally change the concept of a claim. Often the problem arises when a less common definition is assigned to the word thus confusing everyone for whom the meaning is incorrect.

In this thread we have been dealing with the words, truth, facts, and reality. I see now just how hung up I can get, myself, on a 'common' definition.

Additionally I can see how 'consensus' of wrong thinking can more deeply ingrain that way of thinking, making it very difficult to change. (ie: subjective belief that that belief is truth)

If I am asked to witness an event specifically to provide an accurate account of the event, I will be paying close attention and I will do my best to provide such an account.

I, and probabaly a lot of other poeple, understand that my account is not truth but merely the claims I have made from my subjective memory of only the small part of the event I had witnessed.

Do I believe I speak the truth - yes, I believe my account of the event is given with integrity and honesty so I believe, using one definition of the word truth, that I speak the truth.

However,ODDLY, I know that my account is only partial and is purlty subjective and may not accurately and fully depict "the truth of the matter."

I say that is odd because, even though I have that understanding, I had a very difficult time with this topic and it is all becuase I had an inaccurate understanding of what the words truth, facts, and reality encompass.

I had to relax my mind in the same way you have to relax an injured arm or leg to give complete control of its movement to a doctor.

Thanks Creative for making me relax my mind. I am sure I don't have quite the grasp of this subject as others might, but I have learned somethings about myself and I like that.

Well Di I am glad your mind is relaxed.

I understand what Creative is getting at but it does not relax my mind because it required too much thinking.

I prefer just being and communicating. Too much over thinking strains my brain.

Absolutely. By that definition of "truth" I always speak the truth and everything I say is true (i.e. It's honest).

From that perspective I can make the same claim as was attributed to Jesus:

"I am the truth".

Perhaps that's what he meant by that. "I am honest".

The truth is I exist.

Existence is truth.

It is what is.

It is the state of affairs.