What is Objective Truth

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by wil

I'd hesitate to say it looks like you are getting stuck on nuance, since that seems to be the topic. Reminds me an awful lot of the absolute truth discussion, but I'm hoping no one here has particular agenda... I would like to understand how they relate though, absolute and objective...

If I may jump in...

>>The sky is blue. Is this statement objective or relative, and why?

relative, based on perspective, and incompleteness sunrise, sunset, nighttime, overcast...


>>The sea is green. Is this statement objective or relative, and why?

relative, color varies with location...from space quite blue, from a ship often green, black, in the islands amazingly blue...

>>We breathe oxygen. Is this statement objective or relative, and why?

I guess objective...We is us, if breathe is what goes in and out of our lungs, and oxygen is one of the many ingredients exchanged in the process. While it isn't the only, nor do we take in to our bodies all the oxygen we inhale..we do breathe oxygen. I'm agreeing because if we debate the definition of 'is' we won't get anywhere.

Objective. If we don't bring oxygen (at 5% available for metabolism function per breath), into our lungs and it isn't pathed into our blood stream, we as a physical entity are physically dead, in less than two heart beats. Brain dead in less than 5 minutes. 97% of us can live in a pure oxygen environement. 0% can live in an environment lacking oxygen.

Objective. The sky is blue due to the properties that deflect or reflect, absorb, or not absorb light other than blue frequencies. Oxygen refracts the color blue, even on the planet Mars under certain conditions...

Objective. The sea is clear in its natural collective and un polluted state. Blue with a Nitrogen/oxygen atmospher like we have. Why? reflection of the upper atmosphere. A mirror if you will. It turns green or other colors locally, due to different environments, but that is not its natural state.

my thoughts

v/r

Q

[RubySera_Martin]

Originally Posted by wil

So if anyone has a few spare days...check out the topics on truth here on this site over the past few years....

I clicked on it yesterday and a whole batch of titles of threads came up with the word truth in them. I figured if I had time to look through all those threads I'd learn what Wil is suggesting. Haven't tried it yet today.

[RubySera_Martin]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Kindest Regards, RubySera!


I am not sure where or how you got the idea I was attacking you, or "discounting" your ideas. If I in some way did so, I apologize, but I really do not see where I did so. I do understand how an attitude that is not there can be read into something, which is why I try very hard to watch what I say and how I say it. If I intend sarcasm, I make it very plain and evident. If I intend anger or some other unpleasantness, I make that apparent as well. I seldom use anger. I use sarcasm more often, even then I meter it out. I used neither of these with you up until you expressed anger with me. I am truly confused, as I did not point any attitude at you, and you came screaming back at me with attitude. I can let bygones be bygones, if they truly are bygone…

BTW, I think you finally have it figured out.

Peace? It's your call…

This paragraph from my post above contains the answer, sir:

Okay, I've read through the post. I don't understand a thing you say. I think you are saying exactly what I said, except for the fact that you remove yourself one step further from the fact you are discussing. I think most of the questions you ask are answered in my posts, esp. the ones about who owned the land before my grandfather and who will own it after my cousin. But you treat the whole thing as if I were totally wrong. I conclude we are speaking two different languages.
***********************

Normally when we want to be respectful of others with whom we are in conversation we acknowledge their positive contribution to the conversation. When we want to disagree with something they said, we acknowledge it, too. You failed miserably on all counts. You took it upon yourself to repeat what I said without apology or acknowledgement as though what I said was wrong. And then you ask why I am offended.

You're the age of my little brother. Go figure.

[RubySera_Martin]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Objective. The sea is clear in its natural collective and un polluted state. Blue with a Nitrogen/oxygen atmospher like we have. Why? reflection of the upper atmosphere. A mirror if you will. It turns green or other colors locally, due to different environments, but that is not its natural state.

In the summer of 2000 I spent some time on the shores of Georgian Bay. On clear days it was the loveliest shade of blue that I have ever seen anywhere on earth (not that I've seen much of this planet, I should add). The photographs I took don't capture that shade.

[China Cat Sunflower]

What is objective truth?

This is so easy. Objective truth is the truth of objects. Whatever an object is, of itself, is its objective truth. There!

We should really ask: what is the difference between truth in a concrete sense, and the abstract, philosophical notion of Truth? Abstract concepts are hard to drag down into the concrete world of objects and objective logic. Relative truth is an entirely different thing which has more to do with the shared perception of accurate nomenclature and grammer.

So, before we start talking about truth we should say what sphere we're referring to. No example, allegory, or parable can stand on two legs. There has to be an agreement about the parameters and limitations, where the brackets lie, so that everyone involved is looking at the same apple or orange.

In terms of God, and the idea that God posesses the ultimate, objective truth, or is Itself that Truth, I'll try to phrase the question appropriately: Is there an objective meta-Truth that permeates and informs all levels or spheres of action, intelligence, and/or consciousness from the most sublime/abstract to the most concrete/coarse? Is there something which is true on all levels, can be infinitely induced, reduced, deducted, and transposed without any degredation?

Chris

[juantoo3]

RubySera,

You're the age of my little brother. Go figure.

I see.

You are one of those.

Very well.

An olive branch was offered.

You declined.

Your choice.

No skin off my nose.

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, China Cat!

Hmmm, if objective truth is the truth about objects, then perhaps relative truth is the truth about relatives?

[RubySera_Martin]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

RubySera,



I see.

You are one of those.

Very well.

An olive branch was offered.

You declined.

Your choice.

No skin off my nose.

Unrepentent sinners who put branches in the hands of those whom they have disrespected may well find themselves minus some skin one day. Maybe minus more than a bit of skin.

[juantoo3]

You're not worth the effort to respond to, you came in with a chip on your shoulder daring someone to knock it off. And then you want to sit in judgement over them?

[China Cat Sunflower]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Kindest Regards, China Cat!

Hmmm, if objective truth is the truth about objects, then perhaps relative truth is the truth about relatives?

Hmmm, yes, I believe you're right!

Chris

[RubySera_Martin]

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

What is objective truth?

This is so easy. Objective truth is the truth of objects. Whatever an object is, of itself, is its objective truth. There!

We should really ask: what is the difference between truth in a concrete sense, and the abstract, philosophical notion of Truth? Abstract concepts are hard to drag down into the concrete world of objects and objective logic. Relative truth is an entirely different thing which has more to do with the shared perception of accurate nomenclature and grammer.

So, before we start talking about truth we should say what sphere we're referring to. No example, allegory, or parable can stand on two legs. There has to be an agreement about the parameters and limitations, where the brackets lie, so that everyone involved is looking at the same apple or orange.

In terms of God, and the idea that God posesses the ultimate, objective truth, or is Itself that Truth, I'll try to phrase the question appropriately: Is there an objective meta-Truth that permeates and informs all levels or spheres of action, intelligence, and/or consciousness from the most sublime/abstract to the most concrete/coarse? Is there something which is true on all levels, can be infinitely induced, reduced, deducted, and transposed without any degredation?

Chris

So what is it called when we talk about telling the truth? I'm talking about stating things the way they are on the level of everyday life. Take the earlier example of my address. I can make something up and you will have no way of finding me. Or I can tell you exactly where I live and actually be there when you call. The latter statement would normally be considered a truthful statement. The verbal statement fits reality as it is lived on the everyday level. Is that relative truth or objective truth or some other kind of truth?

[RubySera_Martin]

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

Hmmm, yes, I believe you're right!

Chris

I've been wanting to say that but I figured it shouldn't come from me at this specific point in time.

[China Cat Sunflower]

Originally Posted by RubySera_Martin

So what is it called when we talk about telling the truth? I'm talking about stating things the way they are on the level of everyday life. Take the earlier example of my address. I can make something up and you will have no way of finding me. Or I can tell you exactly where I live and actually be there when you call. The latter statement would normally be considered a truthful statement. The verbal statement fits reality as it is lived on the everyday level. Is that relative truth or objective truth or some other kind of truth?

If you tell me where you actually live that's truth. In terms of what I was proposing that would be relative truth because it relies on artifically created values like address numbers, but I can still check a map and find you, so that's truth.

I mean, let's not be dorks, everyone knows what truth is unless we start splitting hairs and try to force philosophical concepts into the mundane realm.

Chris

[lunamoth]

A quick read of wiki illustrates that the definition of Truth is pretty hotly debated. Here's a bit I liked:

Originally Posted by wiki

William James's version of the pragmatic theory, while complex, is often summarized by his statement that "the 'true' is only the expedient in our way of thinking, just as the 'right' is only the expedient in our way of behaving."[14] By this, James meant that truth is a quality the value of which is confirmed by its effectiveness when applying concepts to actual practice (thus, "pragmatic"). John Dewey, less broadly than James but more broadly than Peirce, held that inquiry, whether scientific, technical, sociological, philosophical or cultural, is self-corrective over time if openly submitted for testing by a community of inquirers in order to clarify, justify, refine and/or refute proposed truths.[15]

This is talking about pragmatic truth, which seems to me a subset of objective truth. Here' my definition of truth: that which can be trusted.

2 c,
luna

[China Cat Sunflower]

... perhaps relative truth is the truth about relatives?

Truth is: Nobody will screw you like family.

Chris