What the hell...

swiftcobra15 said:The real kicker is... how can we actually know what the truth is? Or better yet, does anyone even truly possess it?
Unless we have a grip on it—or someone else does—we can't even begin to measure how far off we are from reality. Without that benchmark, everything just feels like an illusion...

I'm not saying that "the" absolute truth is specifically this or that. I’m just suggesting it's essentially out of our reach. To put it bluntly... it's just not there for us to grab.😉

I'm right there with you on the first part, but I don't see how you get to that second conclusion...😉

swiftcobra15 said:Heh... it’s not quite that simple of a process, you know.😁

Honestly, it isn't even half as complicated as people make it out to be. You know the type—those folks who cling desperately to something, thinking everything will just collapse if they let go... instead of just learning how to stand on their own two feet or walk by themselves. 😉

mistyfox812 said:Well, that "extreme simplification" is exactly where the issue lies. If you claim there is no truth, then from my perspective, conversation becomes either total nonsense or merely an exercise in conforming to others.
If we reject the idea that speech is meaningless—since we are clearly all here trying to achieve some level of clarity—then we are left with the latter: speech is just social alignment. That would imply that the majority opinion is inherently "right," while any individual who refuses to conform is necessarily "wrong," simply because "right and wrong" supposedly don't exist. [/URL]

When I suggest that truth is inaccessible in this context, what I mean is that it is UNSPEAKABLE. However, as social beings (or rather, generic ones), we have to communicate—relying heavily on language—to understand one another, even if we don't necessarily agree.

In principle, a majority opinion is just as incapable of grasping the absolute truth as a minority view, yet it remains absolutely vital for our social fabric.
We can look back today and argue that Socrates was right (because we’ve formed a new consensus), but at the time, the prevailing public opinion condemned him and signed his death warrant.

So, communication is deeply meaningful, but its goal isn't to reach "The Truth" (despite what some people pretend), but rather to foster community.

Those who claim to "possess" the truth—take the Inquisition, Joseph Stalin, or Adolf Hitler, for example—have committed far more atrocities than those who are simply "ignorant." This makes the self-proclaimed keepers of truth incomparably more dangerous than those who are merely mistaken or just searching for answers. 😉

swiftcobra15 said:When I say truth is out of reach—at least in this context—what I mean is that it’s basically UNSPEAKABLE. But look, we’re social creatures (or just generic beings, whatever), so we have to communicate using language as our main tool just to understand each other, even if we don't actually agree.

The majority opinion is pretty much just as incapable of grasping the absolute truth as a minority view is, but it’s still everything when it comes to how society functions.
We can sit here today and claim Socrates was right (mostly because we’ve formed a new consensus), but back then, the majority opinion—not necessarily by headcount, but by influence—sent him to his death.

So, yeah, speech is super meaningful, but it isn't really about chasing down "The Truth" (even if some people act like it is); it's more about finding common ground.

And honestly? The "owners" of truth (think the Inquisition, Joseph Stalin, or Adolf Hitler) have caused way more damage than the "ignorant" ones ever could. That’s why anyone claiming to "possess" the truth is infinitely more dangerous than someone who's just lost or still searching.😉

Obviously, you can't actually "own" the truth.
But I still stand by the idea that one statement can be "truer" than another, even if none of them represent the "whole truth," an "eternal truth," or some "absolute truth."
The measure of how "true" something is isn't just some random guess; it’s somehow baked into the very nature of things, whatever "nature" or "reality" might actually be.

Mr. Pes said:It isn't even half as complicated as those people claim—you know, the ones who grab onto something way too tight and think they’ll just collapse if they let go—instead of actually learning how to stand or walk on their own. 😉

Look, I agree it’s not nearly as complex as some folks make it out to be, but at the same time, it’s definitely not as simple as others want to pretend... at least, that's my take on it from where I'm sitting.😉