Why truth?

When someone tells me "what you said is incorrect", or "that's not true", why is this automatically thought to be a criticism and not a compliment? Truth now appears to be the underlying basis on which all things are judged, and this is beyond question to the point that not many people are aware of the fact we are using it in this way. The idea that truth, as a concept, needs to be justified is not given a moment's thought by those who use it as the basis of all their thinking.

No other concept is given such an incredible reception. Why truth?

 

is truth a concept?

 

Yes.

 

If there is no truth there's no point waking up in the morning. Even simple truth is good. The theory of non contradiction - "A thing cannot both be and not be at the same time and in the same respect" is a basic tenet of how we understand our existence.

 

This, when people say truth they mean their constitution of reality.
Truth equals what is real. The false is not true and therefore does not exist. If you can demonstrate inconsistency then it is a viewpoint divorced from the whole picture.

I agree to feel your believe being threatened, appears a mortal danger, but it is not painful to change your mind, only to resist it.

 

But that still doesn't answer the question - why is it any better to build my world view based on truth, rather than say, no truth at all or even untruth? Why do I need a bubble of reality? Can't I wish to live in fantasy of my own creation?

TheDope - existence is another human concept. So it is of no benefit to say that something that is not true "does not exist". Both are in reference to whatever standard of truth or existence we choose to apply.

 

Well, fantasy is not truth, what is not true is not real.

Why do you need reality, it is your being. Nothing real can be threatened, nothing unreal exists. You are real, your descriptions of what you are can be off. For instance, if your position cannot be shared. Fantasies are individual and are not exactly the same for everyone.

 

You seem to be finding it hard to justify truth - all of those statements can also be viewed as being in favor of untruth, if I happen to value that more. This is what I was referring to in my OP. Can we at least agree that truth is a human value that we have no way of knowing about outside of ourselves? That might get us somewhere in finding out WHY we value it.

 

Well if we agree that truth is a human value then we have not agreed on truth.
What you find valuable and what I find valuable, may not be the same. This is why I make this distinction equating truth with reality, because reality we all share, it is our perspectives, the things we choose to embrace as individuals, that is different for everyone. You have things you are seeking, they may not be the things others are seeking, but they are all here.

 

I am just trying to get your argument down. You seem to be leaning towards saying that truth is useful - when we say or intimate that something is "real" or "exists" it is in a shared context that can be used in communication. Or am I totally off the track?

 

You are on track. Knowledge is, being shared, real is something we all are.

 

I doubt whether one can experience untruth. What is real is what is true, and everything is real. In the sense that what is real is what is being experienced. Lies are a fact; facts are true.

 

So if I see fairies and elves or Satan on my latest magic mushroom trip, all real? Dreaming I was abducted by aliens last night means I was?

 

No it only means the dream was real. I don't know if the fairies, elves, and Satans are real on a mushroom trip...but if you see them, you're definitely seeing "something." Even if that something is just the result of neurons misfiring. Whatever it is, it still actually exists. It doesn't matter if it's something you could physically touch.

But everything is physical in some way. Everything has a physical counterpart, even if it's an imaginary being. And you can't distinguish between the physical counterpart and the thing itself. Or if you can, then you're really opening up a new world apart from physical reality.

 

They may also be the things that just plain got in the way. And in the light of man as God, (you are that now, aren't ya'?) the Truth exists (setting you free) just to conclude that there is someone bigger and smarter than I am.

 

Wait a minute. We (you) just did make that distinction, when you distinguished elves seen as a result of drug intoxication and the neuronal misfiring that seemed to cause them. If those elves are real, and reality is defined as being 'shared' as thedope claims, why can't I experience those elves that you dream?

 

Hey, the question is, Walsh, who's Walsh? Do you believe in lower taxes for the ambitious familyman?:bobby::bobby::bobby:


http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/30/us/texas-occupy-austin/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn

 

If reality being shared means that we all have to experience the same things, then that would mean nothing is real, since no one ever has an identical experience.

Anything that is experienced belongs to a shared reality. It doesn't matter what anyone's opinion of what the claims are. If it happened it happened in the real world. Not being able to confirm it doesn't make anything that happened unreal either.