“Truth” doesn’t refer to beliefs. That would make it subjective. Truth independent of thought is objective.
It seems to me that noumena is what I mean when I refer to objective reality. — AJJ
while they may be true irrespective of what any particular person believes about them, are not objective, because they don't pertain to the realm of objects — Wayfarer
The problem I see with this argument is that it is not so much that we ought to believe facts but rather that if we accept something as a fact we cannot disbelieve it. — Janus
“The cat is on the mat” is false if the cat is not on the mat. — AJJ
You have a good point. That there is Truth does not necessarily mean that we have access to it. However, I don’t think this affects the OP argument, since it can still be the case that facts ought to be believed, even if we can never really know what is and is not a fact. — AJJ
Sure, I accept all that. So when I’ve been talking about objective truth and objective values then really I’ve been referring to transcendental truth and transcendental values. — AJJ
I am however curious if you are working within a Kantian view, or you would want to point in another direction. — boethius
It seems to me that a person who actually lived as if there were no truth would collapse right where they were, to eventually die and rot away; because there’d be no reason for them to do anything else. — AJJ
The transcendental Truth — AJJ
general failure to consider Truth abstracted from any concrete example; to consider a fact as something that participates in the Truth, rather than a material instance of something. — AJJ
And this idea that there is no Truth existing independently of us doesn't have to leave us feeling powerless, on the contrary if we are the ones shaping the world then we are potentially omnipotent, the world is what we make it, Truth is what we make it, God resides in each one of us if you will. — leo
You have a point here, but does it preclude that facts ought to be believed? — AJJ
I agree with you here that "we'd want the truth to be that which we cannot disbelieve", but I am defending the view that we could just "disbelieve it anyway", as an act of will. — boethius
If we cannot but believe something we acknowledge as fact, doesn't that leave the only place for an "ought" as consisting in the condition that we ought to acknowledge facts as facts? — Janus
If there is any doubt that some proposition is a fact, then how can it be determined that it ought to be acknowledged as such? — Janus
I can only speak from my own experience, and I find myself incapable of willfully disbelieving anything that I see as being a fact. The question is what must I acknowledge as factual and on the basis of what must I acknowledge it? — Janus
What are the problems that you think are solved by not believing in Truth, or by supposing that all truth is relative? — PossibleAaran
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.