"Truth" What is it?

[Draka]

Religiously speaking, people have different concepts of what "truth" is. There are "personal truths" and "absolute truths", or some use the words subjective and objective respectively. As long as people are working from different definitions in regard to their beliefs, is it any wonder that arguments go round and round?

So what is your definition of "truth" and how does it play into your religion?


Reminder, I'm asking for the definition of the word "truth", not what your "truth" is or what you consider the "truth" to be.

 

[Walkntune]

Truth is bigger than mans ego and control of trying to define it.Truth is what defines us. Sometimes we can touch it or get a little glimpse.

 

[linwood]

Religiously speaking, people have different concepts of what "truth" is. There are "personal truths" and "absolute truths", or some use the words subjective and objective respectively. As long as people are working from different definitions in regard to their beliefs, is it any wonder that arguments go round and round?

So what is your definition of "truth" and how does it play into your religion?


Reminder, I'm asking for the definition of the word "truth", not what your "truth" is or what you consider the "truth" to be.

Truth is a concept that can be verified.

Where most opinions differ is in what the acceptable standards of that verification are.

 

[Kathryn]

truth

noun \ˈtrüth\
plural truths\ˈtrüthz, ˈtrüths\
Definition of TRUTH

1
a archaic : fidelity, constancy b : sincerity in action, character, and utterance

2
a (1) : the state of being the case : fact (2) : the body of real things, events, and facts : actuality (3) often capitalized : a transcendent fundamental or spiritual reality b : a judgment, proposition, or idea that is true or accepted as true <truths of thermodynamics> c : the body of true statements and propositions

3
a : the property (as of a statement) of being in accord with fact or reality b chiefly British : true 2 c : fidelity to an original or to a standard

4
capitalized Christian Science : god

&#8212; in truth : in accordance with fact : actually
Truth - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

 

[Draka]

Truth is a concept that can be verified.

Where most opinions differ is in what the acceptable standards of that verification are.

So your idea of "truth" is something that can be verified? So, in your opinion, what are the acceptable standards of verification when dealing with "truth" in regards to religious concepts? And who determines those standards and why?

 

[Kathryn]

Truth is "what is."

The problem lies in the fact that all of us accept some things as true without demanding irrefutable evidence.

For instance, most of us believe that our parents are truly our parents, though very few of us have insisted on paternity tests.

No, most people only seem to demand irrefutable evidence when someone else is trying to claim something they disagree with is truth.

 

[Draka]

truth

noun \&#712;trüth\
plural truths\&#712;trüthz, &#712;trüths\
Definition of TRUTH

1
a archaic : fidelity, constancy b : sincerity in action, character, and utterance

2
a (1) : the state of being the case : fact (2) : the body of real things, events, and facts : actuality (3) often capitalized : a transcendent fundamental or spiritual reality b : a judgment, proposition, or idea that is true or accepted as true <truths of thermodynamics> c : the body of true statements and propositions

3
a : the property (as of a statement) of being in accord with fact or reality b chiefly British : true 2 c : fidelity to an original or to a standard

4
capitalized Christian Science : god

— in truth : in accordance with fact : actually
Truth - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Do you base your idea of what is religiously or spiritually "true" on any part of this dictionary definition? And how to you come to the conclusion of "truth" based on these definitions?

 

[Kathryn]

Also, some things are true whether they are proven or not. For instance, for hundreds of years (at least), some people believed the earth to be round, while others believed it to be flat. It is round. It was round when they couldn't prove it to be round.

It is what it is.

 

[Kathryn]

Draka, my position is this. Truth is truth regardless of whether or not we can offer proof of that truth. It is truth whether we believe it or not. It is what it is whether man, from his limited perspective, believes it or not.

 

[Draka]

Truth is "what is."

The problem lies in the fact that all of us accept some things as true without demanding irrefutable evidence.

For instance, most of us believe that our parents are truly our parents, though very few of us have insisted on paternity tests.

No, most people only seem to demand irrefutable evidence when someone else is trying to claim something they disagree with is truth.

But, if you see "what is" one way and someone else sees "what is" a different way, then why shouldn't either of you ask for evidence of the other?

It's like the blind men all touching a different part of an elephant and trying to describe what an elephant is. Each has their own "truth" and even though they disagree, none are truly entirely "wrong" either.

 

[Kathryn]

I'm not saying we shouldn't search for proof of what we believe to be true. What I am saying is that just because we can't prove something, doesn't make it untrue. We are limited in our perceptions and in our intellectual grasp of reality.

 

[Draka]

Draka, my position is this. Truth is truth regardless of whether or not we can offer proof of that truth. It is truth whether we believe it or not. It is what it is whether man, from his limited perspective, believes it or not.

If man's perspective is so limited then wouldn't it stand to reason that, religiously, the "truth" is beyond what men can conceptualize, and therefore, all concepts of "absolute truth" come up lacking?

 

[Revoltingest]

Truth:
The rigorous definition of the only examples: An a priori construct (eg, mathematics) which is self consistent
The common usage: Something factual, ie verifiable by all
The non-applicable: Values, morals, the supernatural
The upshot: People tell you they have it. Be skeptical when they want your money or offer you Kool-Aid.

 

[Kathryn]

I'm skeptical of those who claim to have the truth but want me to pay for it. I'm skeptical of those who claim to have the truth but want to serve it up with Kool Aid. And I'm skeptical of those who claim that they respect everyone's version of the truth - when some people's ideas of what is true differ so much from other people's ideas of truth.

 

[Penumbra]

The dictionary definition of truth works for me. An objective truth is basically that which is the case, and it remains the truth regardless of whether it is known or not.

As far as personal truths go, I think that in most cases, "personal truth" is not the best term. If two people have radically different worldviews that specifically make objective claims about reality, they may or may not conflict. When they do, it means one or more of the worldviews is mistaken or incomplete, and therefore at least partially untrue.

This is where a difference between "true" and "useful" comes into play. Some true things are not useful, some useful things are not true, some things are both useful and true, and some things are neither useful nor true. Personal truths are typically more like personal philosophies, personal values, personal useful ideas, or personal ways of interpretation, rather than that which should carry the word "truth".

 

[Kathryn]

If man's perspective is so limited then wouldn't it stand to reason that, religiously, the "truth" is beyond what men can conceptualize, and therefore, all concepts of "absolute truth" come up lacking?

Why are you insistent on separating "religious" truth from other truth?

Truth is truth, period.

It's when we don't acknowledge that truth exists at all, that we start down a very slippery slope.

 

[Kathryn]

The dictionary definition of truth works for me. An objective truth is basically that which is the case, and it remains the truth regardless of whether it is known or not.

As far as personal truths go, I think that in most cases, "personal truth" is not the best term. If two people have radically different worldviews that specifically make objective claims about reality, they may or may not conflict. When they do, it means one or more of the worldviews is mistaken or incomplete, and therefore at least partially untrue.

This is where a difference between "true" and "useful" comes into play. Some true things are not useful, some useful things are not true, some things are both useful and true, and some things are neither useful nor true. Personal truths are typically more like personal philosophies, personal values, personal useful ideas, or personal ways of interpretation, rather than that which should carry the word "truth".

Right on.

 

[Twig pentagram]

Religiously speaking, people have different concepts of what "truth" is. There are "personal truths" and "absolute truths", or some use the words subjective and objective respectively. As long as people are working from different definitions in regard to their beliefs, is it any wonder that arguments go round and round?

So what is your definition of "truth" and how does it play into your religion?


Reminder, I'm asking for the definition of the word "truth", not what your "truth" is or what you consider the "truth" to be.

Truth is the factual state of things.

 

[McBell]

Truth is "what is."

The problem lies in the fact that all of us accept some things as true without demanding irrefutable evidence.

Oh, you mean like "God Exists"?
But wait, now you have to define 'irrefutable evidence"...

No, most people only seem to demand irrefutable evidence when someone else is trying to claim something they disagree with is truth.

ANd if said "irrefutable evidence" does not exist?
As is the case with God?

 

[McBell]

Why are you insistent on separating "religious" truth from other truth?

Because they are two separate things.

Truth is truth, period.

I have to completely disagree.
Unless of course you can present some "irrefutable evidence" that God exists...

It's when we don't acknowledge that truth exists at all, that we start down a very slippery slope.

Who has done that?

I mean, I have repeatedly heard the exact opposite, that there is some grand all encompassing absolute religious truth, but have seen absolutely nothing outside unsubstantiated claims that it actually exists.