Truthiness and Factuality

Nature is everything in the world, galaxy, and universe that has not been constructed and processes from other things in the world, galaxy, and universe. All wild animals are considered natural because they are how they are due to nature.The difference between tame and wild is a human constructed, a false sense of singularity is born. Humans are also wild animals, they simply have the ability to leave greater scars on the rest of history and recognize more than their basest instinct. All humans are still driven by instinct, to gain more knowledge is not an objective pursuit because it is caused by biased motivations. A scientist may search for it out of love learned from the environment in which he grew up. Just as the zealot will invariably press the detonator in the name of his god this is a learned behavior, though not always so direct.

So humans are a part of nature and civilization is an illusion as much as any imaginary world or being. So as we have seen all worlds are controlled not by fact but perception. To a man of God he was born of God and to his fellows he is correct. If all men thought the same then he would be begotten of God. There would be no opposition no doubt in that truth. It is then not only truth but irrefutable fact. Results of tests are all biased. The light entering the eyes of the scientist has no meaning, it is the interpreting brain that gives it meaning. It is the brain that decides if the light exists at all and if it exists at all. That said each man may as well be mad if no other can see his view because they are all right to themselves. That is why truth and fact are governed by choice and consensus, human constructions that are biased and inaccurate.

What I tell you all is true. What you tell me is also true, neither contradicts the other, neither can be antithetical. I can fly ten feet above the ground if you think I can and I think I can, but I can't because I don't believe it. Each being is a microcosm. No being is alone. We are all together, but no one sees the same world.

So is there a fact beyond human construction? If it exists can we fathom, perceive or even conceive of it? Am I asking you, or are you asking me?

I was bored, thoughts?

 

What I'll say is this.

Absolute truths do exist. You hear "The truth is as you perceive it", but that is in itself not true at all. Perceptions of the truth may vary, but the truth itself is indepedent of subjective viewpoints. Either something is factual or it isn't.

I don't think humans really have the capacity to find the absolute truth (not for a long time, anyway), because there's always a way of rationalizing what we consider impossible, no matter how ridiculous it is, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

 

No offence, but that sounds suspiciously like copypasta xD

But yeah, no two people see the same colour blue. However, this does not stop the majority of us calling it blue (or one of the hundreds, if not thousands, of shades and variations of blue).
If you asked a colour blind person to look at something and someone with "normal" sight to look at the same thing they may well give you completely different answers.

But, the point that is missed in the above post is that there are no absolutes in the universe. We observe the world around us and conduct experiments to find out what happens the majority of the time. Nothing is just accepted as "fact" after one observation. If you did that you could say that toast always lands butter side down or that it always rains on a Tuesday. That is not the case. It is repeated and sometimes continual observation and experimentation that allows certain ideas and theories to enter the realm of fact.

On the point of religious belief and god, there is no constant observation and experimentation. There is a religious leader and a book that tell you what is fact, and tell you to belief it.

It is also true that just because a large number of people believe something to be true, it does not mean that it is. People do not decide what is true or fact, experimentation and observation do. Saying that scientists are "biased" because the structure of their eyes are not all the same is just, well, wrong =/

A lot of this sounds like a gross over-simplification and misuse of the Anthropic Principle. We do not decide what is fact, the facts are there already. We have to take the time and energy to uncover these facts and then exploit them for our benefit (or the detriment of our enemies). Saying that light does not exist until it is recognised by the brain as real is again, wrong. That light beam is there whether you see it or not.

Sorry HadesDragon, but there no absolutes (as far as I'm aware, and in the laws of physics anyway). Space and time are not absolute, the Conservation of Energy can be broken, entropy has gone backwards etc. The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle tends to make it that any and all predictions will eventually boil down to chance; the roll of a die.

I hope I haven't missed anything out, but I'm tired and ill.

 

You seem to have misunderstood me.

I didn't say the laws that govern the universe are absolute, just that the truth is (which are different things). If something really *is* a certain way, then it *is* that way and no amount of denying it will change the fact that it is that way.

If the laws of the universe are really not absolute, that is itself a truth. Saying they work all the time and dying with that belief won't change the fact that they aren't.

Actually, what I was trying to get across is something similar to what you yourself said:

If the light does really exist before it's recognized by the brain, then that's that and no subjective viewpoint on the issue will change the fact that it's true.

 

Sorry xD Completely misunderstood what you were trying to say. See, a simple misunderstanding and two people debating on the same side can think they are opponents ;D