No different.



No different.

Notice how she is not objectifying truth by prefixing it with "a" or "the"?

No different treatment, which is what I've been arguing all along.

msmyka,

What, on your view, is the difference between a true/opinion/belief claim and a false one?

Opinions by definition are neither true or false as they do not require any factual justification.

Yes you are.

I take it that this is your personal opinion and views on truth.

I personally do not feel that truth is central to everything thought, believed, and or known.

I have many thoughts that could never be "true" in terms of actual physical manifestation. So truth is certainly not central to all of my thoughts. In fact, cannot even imagine a life where all my thoughts were restricted by truth. It seems to me that such a life would be horrible, and extremely restricted especially in terms of creativity and imagination.

Truth is also not important to me in terms of "beliefs". But then I confess that you and I may have wildly different semantic interpretations of this term "belief". I personally try not to get bogged down by words, and would rather attempt to just address the concepts more openly.

I struggle myself with concepts that we try to label with words like "Belief", "Faith", "Imagination", etc.

I've have discovered that the most productive way to approach spiritual work is to simply accept things to be "true" even if you have strong convictions that they are not "true".

That may sound strange, especially to someone who values pure logic and analytical reasoning. However, what I have discovered is that this approach has value and merit. And things that at first appeared to be impossible can indeed become possible.

So what I have learned is that what we consider to be truth itself is a malleable concept.

Just like time and space turned out to be malleable and not absolute as were once thought, I have come to realize that the same is true of "truth".

Similar to the Twin Brother's Paradox that I spoke of earlier, truths that appear to be in contradiction with each other may ultimately not be in contradiction with each other after all, in light of a larger picture.

Therefore things that you might feel cannot possibly be "true" since they would conflict with something else that you strongly believe to have already ascertained to be "true", may actually be true anyway, in spite of your conviction that they would 'contradict' what you believe to already know to be truth.

In other words, it seems to me that what you are concerned with is the idealization of attempting to build a philosophy of "truth" that is based on the preconceived ideal that truths cannot contradict each other. If two "truth" conflict, at least one or both of them must be in error.

As I say, the Twin Brother's Paradox has already shown that this itself is faulty reasoning. Truths can indeed be in conflict with each other and still both be simultaneously true.

Therefore any quest to build a philosophy based on a chain of truths that must never conflict is already doomed to fail.

So is truth central to everything thought, believed, and or known.

OR, could it be that truth is actually malleable and rather than being central to everything, it may actually be a consequence of everything.

Things may actually be inside-out to what you are expecting the case to be.

This has just been an opinion. A personal view from my perspective.

It may or may not contain "truths".

I just offer it as insight for whatever it's worth.

Ok, understood... but opinions can be true, even if they do not require factual justification simply because they can correspond to fact.

Agreed?

Then I (personally) would call it a fact and not an opinion... but yes I agree that an opinion can also (but not necessarily) be true.

I agree. Opinions can be true. (See number 2 below.)

******************************


1. True things can be believed, but all beliefs are not true things.

2. Beliefs are opinions whether they are true things or not.

3. Beliefs can be facts.

4. Facts can be believed or not believed.

5. Beliefs can be false.

6. Facts must always be supported and challenged.


Opinions do not have to be supported when they are simply self reporting.

Interesting. Cut out the middle-man. On my view fact is a state of affairs. Truth is correspondence to fact/reality. So, by my view if we were to call a true opinion a fact, it becomes circular, because it is soley by virtue of corresponding to fact that an opinion is true.

I wonder then, how you define fact.

Perhaps the better question would be what makes a claim true?

An opinion is never a fact. May be a fact you have an opinion on something, but the opinion itself is never a fact. For instance it can not even possibly be a fact something is beautiful. One person may think so, one person may not.

Abra,

I cannot make head nor tails of your posts because you keep calling facts, beliefs, and personal opinions/preferences "truth". Those thing are not the same, and making and adhering to the necessary dictinctions is crucial for my gaining an accurate understanding of what it is that you're trying to say.

Something is true and or a fact when it is constant over multiple times. For instance, it's a fact objects fall down. This can be tested by dropping things. If even one of those things you dropped didn't go down, then it would not be a fact.

Well cowboy, I agree with the first thing but not the second.



Let's see what the author has to say about it though. It may be quite profound. Ya never know.

If one's definition of "truth" is subjective would that be also true of one's definition of "fact?"

Beliefs and opinions are not always necessarily truth or facts.

Agreed?

But they can be in some cases.

Agreed?

So can we really know what is true or fact or does it boil down to opinion, belief and agreement?

Also more for the original post of this quoted discussion. Just because something is true, doesn't make it a fact. It may be true that 40 degrees F is cold to you, it may be true that 40 degrees F to someone else is comfortable. Neither one of those is a FACT even though both statements is true. A feeling is never a fact, but again it may be true. It's not a fact because everyone's feelings on certain things differ. These feelings are true to them, but is not a fact for the world.

Abra,

I'm thinking that you're vaguely referring to dialetheism.

Is that correct?

Well that is only true because of your use of the term "fall." Have you ever heard of anything falling up?

If I dropped a helium balloon it would not go down, it would go up.

Can a helium balloon fall? No, because it floats up....

Yes someone's truth is subjective. But no a fact is never subjective. That is why it's a fact.

By the way, dialetheism is the strongest argument against the law of non-contradiction that I know of.



Lots of fun.