Tuesday, October 25, 2005
truth or dare?
What is the nature of truth?
Is truth a static body which you can put boundaries around and is completely unchanging?
Do the boundaries of truth remain flexible? I mean do they operate under a set of principles much like physics or biology but are not restricted to a specific quantifiable entity.
The reason I wonder this is because of how we arrive at truth.
First of all truth is a completely subjective process based completely on what I am conditioned to understand and the faculty I have for comprehension. (agree or disagree)
Secondly I wonder this because of our inherent response to truth. Truth seems to have always defined the finiteness of our behavior. It assumes a controlling role over every perceivable human function.
Let me give you a little story to spark your thinking
Back before Columbus proved Aristotle’s ridiculous idea of a round earth, many people lived and died with what we would now call falsehood. Falsehood they considered to be truth. In saying that truth is static it could be assumed that once discovered truth remains unaltered. But in this case where truth is actually false the onus lies in the discovery which is completely dependant on human volition. So when our access to truth is completely voluntary can there be such a thing as restricted objective truth or is truth an endlessly expanding reality spanning correlated to human perception.
Obviously how we are responsible to truth is hugely impacted. Morality and function are affected as is most importantly our concept of God. Do the principles of truth allow us to hold two seemingly opposing truths in tension or are there boundaries around which we must falsehood?