https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructivist_epistemology ?

thanks! i'm looking for scholarly articles, as well as famous philosophers who have spoken on these ideas.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

I don't really dwell in articles, so please forgive me. But I can speak generally in that this is a historic topic, so you can arguably trace it back to the Greek idea where everything is one. Zeno is my favorite because he's handily archetypal. The next marker would be either Descartes or Kant, who juggled ideas about the mind, and were hugely influential. Their work is documented extensively, the latter accidentally defining a philosophical schism which still exists. The constructivist approach is an attitude which has developed since the 60's, also extensively documented. It's quite modular, almost atomic in principle. Being a champion of independence, I'll save you my personal response to that particular thought, but in essence it's coherentist..

for purpose of this research. truth is what one accepts as being true. my thesis is that knowledge determines truth. and my approach is looking at how one's education, faith, and experience impacts their truth.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

thank-you! veracity is my assigned speech topic. would you say that defining truth is an essential part of my introduction before getting into my main points of education, faith, and experience?

thank-you for those names and direction. my current approach is discussing the different theories of determining truth and how they all fall short of absolute truth. with the conclusion that the only way to obtain absolute truth on any given subject one would have to be omniscient on that subject. an impossible feet.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

Hold on.. truth is regarded as a linguistic qualifier. I feel like terms are being misused here.

What is metaphysically real is called so. Truth is a statement which is logically valid, in language.

"All fathers are male" is a statement of truth. "All fathers exist" is real based on accepted models.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

It would probably rely on the concept of logic. Predicate, term, and propositional.

Your objection is an objection of terms. This can be substituted effortlessly for any other quantifier.

"All fathers are male" is a statement of truth. "All fathers exist" is real based on accepted models." This would fall under the theory of coherence which makes sense based off of your earlier statement of being coherentist. Which is probably the closest way we can test truth, but it still falls short to our human limitation having to accept as true the most coherent explanation with available facts.

In the case that truth is constructed, we can remedy this by rigorous scientific analysis. I adhere to a faintly positivist attitude that science is true, and that humans are merely representations of data which can be expressed mathematically, even their beliefs. It's not perfect but it has a funny habit of predicting the future. To me that's quite real.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

this might sound silly but i have a couple rebuttals to science and math. one is that science is based off of theories (which i understand go under rigorous tests to become such), however theories can/have changed over time with new discoveries. math, obviously something that is universally accepted but one could argue based on their education or lack of that maybe even mathematicians got it wrong. exhibit a: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MS2aEfbEi7s

A=B,B=C, then A=C. this way of testing truth is limited because it requires another test of truth to use standard.

Right. Science's refinement is a subject. I point to the fact humanity has found it useful as the truest marker because competing theories have yet failed to achieve its results.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

Where are you going? Monism?

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

Monism is the idea that all things are of the same substance. Difficulty arises when numbers are paired with physical events because the mind appears to be the only factor pairing them.

I mentioned elsewhere truth is a linguistic statement. All good philosophers define their terms, and the term you are possibly looking for is "reality".

Insofar as truth is concerned, outside of modal logic, it's a statement of preference. The reality that there are no truths and that society is contrived is essentially a statement of belief.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

so is there a philosopher that would agree that one's knowledge obtained from education (in the sense of consensus gentium), beliefs, and experience determines truth?

When you apply terminal logic to terms, they inevitably become atomic and meaningless.

Aquinas was a philosopher who was obsessed with education, and scholasticism endures.

Comments about the social order weren't regarded as relevant in the time Thomas lived.

this may be an odd request but would either of you mind Skyping tomorrow around noon (central time)? the messages are becoming a bit tangled and confusing, and i think it would help with clarification.

"Thrif you make no sense"

Not again..

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

http://www.lexido.com/QUOTATION_KEYWORD.aspx?KEYWORD_ID=134