Truth is a Relation, Condition, and Perspective

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Truth is a Relation, Condition, and Perspective

Postby Prismatic567 » Sun Nov 17, 2019 8:45 am

Truth from the philosophical perspective is a relation, condition and perspective.

    Truth is most often used to mean being in accord with fact or reality, or fidelity to an original or standard.
    -wiki

Thus what we have is this model;

    Reality + Framework = truth

The point with reality is, it is considered within;

    1. Ultimate reality
    2. Empirical reality
    3. Philosophical reality

Humans cannot know the truth of ultimate reality, i.e. reality-by-itself.
Humans can only know the truths based on what they can filter out from a framework of truth they rely upon.

Frameworks of Truths
A framework of truth is established to filter out truths of reality with hopes such truths will facilitate the optimizing of the well-being of humanity.
A known framework is established by humans, thus it is conditioned by human effort done to the best of their abilities.
A framework of truth is also conditioned by the consensus of a particular human group.

Thus it is critical, truth cannot be absolute but at most related [relation] to the conditions of the defined and specific framework.

The following are a list of Framework of truths;

    1. Common sense framework of truths
    2. Social Frameworks
    2. Scientific Framework of scientific truths conditioned by the Scientific Method.
    3. Legal Frameworks, legal truths conditioned by specific legislature systems.
    4. Economic Frameworks truths
    5. Political Frameworks
    6. Philosophical Frameworks
    7. Theistic religious Framework
    8. Non-theistic religious Framework
    9. Spiritual Framework
    10. Moral Framework
    11. Etc. etc. Frameworks

What is held to be true is based on whether they are opinions, belief or objective knowledge [justified true beliefs].

The common sense frameworks of truths are most based on opinions and personal beliefs.

However it is indisputable the most objective knowledge are scientific knowledge which can be justified by anyone who want to test and justify those knowledge.
Therefore we can generally put the confidence level of objectivity and justified true beliefs of scientific knowledge with as high as 90% and others are to be lower.

However when Scientific knowledge which is Universal is complemented with the appropriate also universal philosophical framework-proper, the confidence level can be raised to 95%.

The other frameworks of truth are not universal thus deserve only low than 90% confidence levels.
Example legal frameworks truth are relative to National, State, counties laws which will vary accordingly.
Thus the truth that X is a convicted murder [1st, 2nd degree] must be strongly qualified to the specific legal Framework upon which the conviction is done. X may not be convicted as a murderer in another court.

The political, economics Framework of truth are similar to the legal Framework of truth, i.e. whatever the truth, they must be qualified to the Framework it is based.
The confidence levels which can attributed to the truths of these framework of truths can range from 75% down to 10% or zero [in the case of dictatorships].

Theistic Framework of truths, i.e. doctrinal truths claimed by theists are conditioned to their respective Framework of truths where the beliefs are not open to sound justifications empirically and philosophically. Rather the doctrinal truths are grounded on faith, i.e. beliefs without proofs nor justified reasons. As such, I would place theistic truths with a ZERO% confidence level while theists would have a CL of 100% on their respective doctrine.

Thus whatever the truth, it is always grounded to its Framework of Truth.
Truth is thus fundamentally a relation, condition or perspective to a reality of without absoluteness as reality-by-itself.

Whatever it is a truth or falsehood, what is critical is whether such truths/falsehoods has utility to the survival of humankind?

As such if a truth and falsehood has a net-positive utility to the survival of humankind, such truths or falsehood should be maintain.
For example, the falsehood of a real Santa has utility of net-positivity for children's happiness.
The falsehood of God exists, albeit an illusion, is a critical necessity for the majority of humans which at present is net-positive for human kind. But this falsehood, "God exists as real" is trending toward a net-negative contribution to the well-being of humanity, thus must be neutralized with fool proof alternatives.

Nuclear energy and nuclear bombs are scientific truths with 90+% confidence level, but such truths must be dealt with carefully and reservations as they has the potential to exterminate the human species.

My point;
Truth - abstracted from a human made Framework of Truth, is thus fundamentally a relation, condition or perspective to a reality which is without absoluteness as reality-by-itself.
The critical factor here is not whether a proposition is absolutely true or false but whether whatever is true or false has utility as a net-positive to the well-being of humanity.
I am a progressive human being, a World Citizen, NOT-a-theist and not religious.
Prismatic567
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2673
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 4:35 am

Re: Truth is a Relation, Condition, and Perspective

Postby Dan~ » Sun Nov 17, 2019 5:01 pm

utility = merit ?

That which makes humanity better, is good, even if it is false?

I would agree.
But not absolutely.
I like http://www.accuradio.com , internet radio.
https://dannerz.itch.io/ -- a new and minimal webside now hosting two of my free game projects.
User avatar
Dan~
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10085
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 8:14 am
Location: May the loving spirit of papa hitler watch over and bless you all.

Re: Truth is a Relation, Condition, and Perspective

Postby Prismatic567 » Mon Nov 18, 2019 3:58 am

Dan~ wrote:utility = merit ?

That which makes humanity better, is good, even if it is false?

I would agree.
But not absolutely.

'utility' = the state of being useful, profitable, or beneficial.

In this case, utility meant there is a net-positive contribution to the well being of the individual and therefrom to humanity.

It is quite obvious the truths of scientific knowledge [given its pros and cons] has a net-positive benefit to the individual human and humanity.

Thus, whatever is true or false, it can be of utility of humanity, but one must be well aware of the risks of whatever the cons posed.
I am a progressive human being, a World Citizen, NOT-a-theist and not religious.
Prismatic567
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2673
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 4:35 am


Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users