Eff's Rambles (Archive)


What is truth: Revised edition (Yes I know I do not know what I am talking about).

I have deleted the original and shall now try to better explain how I determine what is truthful.

It is factual that something that is true is true, hence it could not be so if it were not, that being absent or majorly so the factor of human subjective judgement in deciding it as such. But the conclusions toward what is true are not always based in centertainty, so truth must follow logic, as best as any individual or group can be logical in their analysis. Therefor truth is often a matter of the most probable from logic, as human subjective distortions are an unavoidable potentiality, whatever the fallacies of our understandings might be.

To decide what is logical the following must must be learned as best access and time allows. I apologize for the disorderliness of this list.

  • The pattern of events from which one can inductively infer the next event in the presumed series.
  • The pattern of human behavior relating to the events from which one can inductively infer the next type of behavior as it relates to the next event as it is inferred.
  • The deductive and inductively logical elements within the human and events factors which weakens or strengthens the logic of the inferrences about the human and events factors.
  • The preponderance of similarities in the supposed pattern of events.
  • The strengths and weaknesses of the similarities within each event.
  • The strengths and weaknesses should be determined by the level of logically alternative reasons for the similarities, and by the frequency by which persons appear in the event patterns, as well as the probability that said persons could appear, taking into consideration which, if any, persons have died, are too far and incapable of affecting an event.
  • Essentially, doubt must always be considered, if not, any false claim can be used to make a lie or an error seem as if it or conclusions from it are true.

The probable truth is that which we conclude from patterns established by the level of counterveiling reasons for each element within the pattern.

When we cannot conclude logically otherwise, we are left with the objective and probable truth.

We might not always be obligated to accept and agree with the probable, but if we act in strong opposition to it and perhaps what stems from it, we take a great risk.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home


Online dictionary at www.Answers.com

Concise information in one click