So I ask you, Escapists.... What is the Truth?

[Barakiel]

Come to think of it, how often ARE you wrong?

Well, that depends. What are we talking about?

On a factual matter, it's not often that I'm wrong; I like to make sure of what I'm saying before I say it.

When it comes to opinions, however, I'm never wrong. It's simple, really; an opinion can't be wrong.

Opinions can't be wrong? You must be joking.
Some men and women like rape (an opinion)
Is that not wrong?

 

[Gxas]

Provide a lot of evidence and support, there you go. Truth. Provide none, I won't consider your proposition.

I'm not exactly trying to prove anything - I believe I was asking for an answer of truth.

I'm trying to figure out where you got turned around in my post. You asked for how I tell if something is the truth. My answer is that I know something is the truth if provided with a lot of evidence.

And there is where you get turned around.
I never asked HOW you tell if something is the truth, did I?
I asked how you defined what the Truth is.

Is that not the same thing? I tell what the truth is based on evidence and facts. I don't see any difference between the way I worded your question and the way you worded it.

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

42.

Wait...wrong question. Well, it should apply here, too.

 

[Caimekaze]

Come to think of it, how often ARE you wrong?

Well, that depends. What are we talking about?

On a factual matter, it's not often that I'm wrong; I like to make sure of what I'm saying before I say it.

When it comes to opinions, however, I'm never wrong. It's simple, really; an opinion can't be wrong.

Opinions can't be wrong? You must be joking.
Some men and women like rape (an opinion)
Is that not wrong?

It is not an incorrect opinion, in the pure sense of the word. It may be morally disgusting, it may attract (extreme) disapproval from the wider community, but it is not an incorrect opinion, as an opinion is merely a personal evaluation of something; as such, it can neither be right or wrong.

 

[Barakiel]

Is that not the same thing? I tell what the truth is based on evidence and facts. I don't see any difference between the way I worded your question and the way you worded it.

I suppose, in a way, you could think yourself correct, and I may clarify.

I ask you, without context, without fact.

What is "the truth"

 

[Over_Krill]

Some time's what you know to be true is a lie and what you know to be a lie is true.

 

[ma55ter_fett]

The truth is based on simple facts, what happened, when did it happen, why did it happen, there is only one true answer to each question as they pertain to a given fact or occurence.

 

[Nemu]

I just know it's out there.

 

[rokkolpo]

proof. find proof/it's true.
dind't find any proof/not true.

 

[electric discordian]

Truth is beauty, Beauty Truth!

In other news there is no such thing as truth, it is entirely subjective. My truth is different to other peoples.

You have a world view and pick and choose the factoids which support that view! No one can shake you from that course unless there argument is a pervasive one.

And yeah I do mean pervasive and not persuasive!

 

[Barakiel]

It is not an incorrect opinion, in the pure sense of the word. It may be morally disgusting, it may attract (extreme) disapproval from the wider community, but it is not an incorrect opinion, as an opinion is merely a personal evaluation of something; as such, it can neither be right or wrong.

Pure Sense? Are you not using the truth to define the truth?
How do you spell a single letter? I used to do that as a child. I can't remember any I could think of spelling without using the letter itself.

Again? Pure Sense of what?
Truth?
Perception?
Who really does have a pure sense of anything? I can see perfectly, yet I cannot pierce the veil of reality and see individual particle matter. Am I impure?

 

[Slash Dementia]

"Nothing is true, everything is permitted."

 

[DemonicVixen]

What if someone tells you something, makes it sound so true, sticks with it but then suddenly a few weeks later they alter it and can't remember what they originally said? Does that mean they are lying, or just idiotic? How do you really know what anyone says is true, they can say it and believe it to the point where it is true to them when really it isn't. Even the most minor things like saying their favourite colour is orange and then suddenly saying its always been blue. Its a mad world i say... full of lies and traitors. Don't believe a word you hear (even what i say could be a lie, then again, it probably is)

 

[Barakiel]

What if someone tells you something, makes it sound so true, sticks with it but then suddenly a few weeks later they alter it and can't remember what they originally said? Does that mean they are lying, or just idiotic? How do you really know what anyone says is true, they can say it and believe it to the point where it is true to them when really it isn't. Even the most minor things like saying their favourite colour is orange and then suddenly saying its always been blue. Its a mad world i say... full of lies and traitors. Don't believe a word you hear (even what i say could be a lie, then again, it probably is)

So the truth is subjective, as others have said.
As I think I might have pointed out.

 

[Caimekaze]

It is not an incorrect opinion, in the pure sense of the word. It may be morally disgusting, it may attract (extreme) disapproval from the wider community, but it is not an incorrect opinion, as an opinion is merely a personal evaluation of something; as such, it can neither be right or wrong.

Pure Sense? Are you not using the truth to define the truth?
How do you spell a single letter? I used to do that as a child. I can't remember any I could think of spelling without using the letter itself.

Again? Pure Sense of what?
Truth?
Perception?
Who really does have a pure sense of anything? I can see perfectly, yet I cannot pierce the veil of reality and see individual particle matter. Am I impure?

I was referring to the pure sense of holding an opinion, rather than the judgements on holding that opinion. That is to say, you can not argue an opinion, merely the facts that support said opinion. Your own personal opinion on an opinion doesn't not make it right or wrong.

 

[Gxas]

Is that not the same thing? I tell what the truth is based on evidence and facts. I don't see any difference between the way I worded your question and the way you worded it.

I suppose, in a way, you could think yourself correct, and I may clarify.

I ask you, without context, without fact.

What is "the truth"

There is no truth without context or fact. That doesn't exist. There is always context and fact. You are asking how I find the truth with no basis or argument for or against. There is no truth then. There is nothing. There cannot be truth without fact.

 

[Barakiel]

It is not an incorrect opinion, in the pure sense of the word. It may be morally disgusting, it may attract (extreme) disapproval from the wider community, but it is not an incorrect opinion, as an opinion is merely a personal evaluation of something; as such, it can neither be right or wrong.

Pure Sense? Are you not using the truth to define the truth?
How do you spell a single letter? I used to do that as a child. I can't remember any I could think of spelling without using the letter itself.

Again? Pure Sense of what?
Truth?
Perception?
Who really does have a pure sense of anything? I can see perfectly, yet I cannot pierce the veil of reality and see individual particle matter. Am I impure?

I was referring to the pure sense of holding an opinion, rather than the judgements on holding that opinion. That is to say, you can not argue an opinion, merely the facts that support said opinion. Your own personal opinion on an opinion doesn't not make it right or wrong.

But an opinion can be right, just as it may be wrong.
It would be a simple matter to prove, given time.

Two people are driving, and they come across a T intersection. They have to make a choice. Do they go left? or do they go right? In the end, the choice is meaningless, seeing as in this situation both paths are exactly the same for sights, sounds, atmosphere, danger, time taken to reach destination, any statistic you can think of.
Naturally, the one will choose left, the other right.

But why would they do this?

Is that not the same thing? I tell what the truth is based on evidence and facts. I don't see any difference between the way I worded your question and the way you worded it.

I suppose, in a way, you could think yourself correct, and I may clarify.

I ask you, without context, without fact.

What is "the truth"

There is no truth without context or fact. That doesn't exist. There is always context and fact. You are asking how I find the truth with no basis or argument for or against. There is no truth then. There is nothing. There cannot be truth without fact.

Again, you get me wrong!
I never asked how you find the truth
I asked you what the Truth is.
Do you get what I am asking you?

 

[Gxas]

Again, you get me wrong!
I never asked how you find the truth
I asked you what the Truth is.
Do you get what I am asking you?

You asked what the truth is "without context or fact". That is what I responded to. There is no truth without fact.

Once more.

There
is
no
truth
without
fact

Do you get what I'm answering with?

I've answered the same way three times now.