Truth is essential to believe in. — javi2541997
Doesn't that imply that if a falsehood can be believed in, then the truth no longer is needed? — FlaccidDoor
Probably, but falsehood is not connected with believe in due to are contradictory. — javi2541997
can we know that we aren't believing in falsehoods? Can the liars you mention, be believing in falsehoods that they misinterpret as truths? — FlaccidDoor
Usually truths are useful apropos their relevant domains.So my question is: Are truths useful? — FlaccidDoor
No. The only instance of a 'useful falsehood' of which I'm aware is a falsehood – fiction – that conveys a 'truth' indirectly, ironically, figuratively (e.g. poetry, painting, theatre, erotica, etc). Otherwise, falsehoods are useful as lies, blocking or concealing truths from others and/or yourself.Aren't there falsehoods that are more useful?
'My philosophical pursuits' have been useful only as means for me to have widened and deepened my understanding [ ... ]Is the truths that you pursue(d), if you pursue(d) them, useful?
Understanding (re: the function of philosophy, as I see it) is only as "useful" as it is reflectively lived every day, that is, only "useful" for reflective living (i.e. agency).If they aren't useful, do you practice philosophy knowing that finding the truth is useless?
No. Along with 'beauty' & 'good,' 'truth' is itself a criterion for judging that's grounded in – constituted by – understanding: so, the less confused (i.e. untintelligible, inexplicable) your understanding, the less irreflective (i.e. dogmatic, incorrigible) your criteria for judging, then, therefore, the less maladaptive (i.e. frustrating, immiserating, self-defeating) your agency becomes.Is usefulness the correct criteria to judge if we should pursue truth?
So your view is that the truth is necessarily the most useful in the long term, where falsehoods are not so. My view aligns with yours but why would this be true? — FlaccidDoor
Are truths useful? Truth refers to many kinds of ideas so this is a pretty loose series of questions. I think there are many useful applications for truth. In areas where truth matters - health - for instance, an untruth/deception/omission can kill people. I think where people most crave or project truth - in spirituality, or meaning or the nature of reality - we don't know of anything definitive.
Aren't there falsehoods that are more useful? Not sure of your intended meaning here- in some contexts lying is better than truth telling.
Is the truths that you pursue(d), if you pursue(d) them, useful? I have no idea. I was interested in epistemology some years ago. I came to the view that it isn't worth pursuing subjects I am not an expert in. In these I have no clear way of discerning truth. Possibly the most useful thing I know of is the ability to write a clear sentence. It doesn't have to be a true one.
If they aren't useful, do you practice philosophy knowing that finding the truth is useless? I don't practice philosophy but I try to reflect on choices I make and on what ideas/actions I choose to engage with. In real life I suspect philosophy doesn't matter. It does not appear to be useful in quotidian activities.
Is usefulness the correct criteria to judge if we should pursue truth? In some contexts, yes, if the utility of that truth can help conscious creatures to flourish and reduce suffering (I am a piss-poor, simple minded utilitarian). — FlaccidDoor
Yes to all of these. Much of human nature (and certainly not limited to humans) is the preference to rationalize the truth we find convenient rather than rationally seek actual truth. Think of all the people with contradictory philosophies who are nevertheless completely convinced that they're the ones in the right, with everybody else being wrong. They're all lying to themselves, and believing the lies. Not lying that their view is the correct one, but lying that it must be the correct one.Aren't there believable lies and unbelievable truths? I guess my question is: can we know that we aren't believing in falsehoods? Can the liars you mention, be believing in falsehoods that they misinterpret as truths? — FlaccidDoor
They are literally believing in falsehoods but they do not want interpret it as truths because probably this will so painful for them soy they rather live and believe in falsehoods. — javi2541997
Aren't there falsehoods that are more useful?
No. The only instance of a 'useful falsehood' of which I'm aware is a falsehood – fiction – that conveys a 'truth' indirectly, ironically, figuratively (e.g. poetry, painting, theatre, erotica, etc). Otherwise, falsehoods are useful as lies, blocking or concealing truths from others and/or yourself. — 180 Proof
No. Along with 'beauty' & 'good,' 'truth' is itself a criterion for judging that's grounded in – constituted by – understanding: so, the less confused (i.e. untintelligible, inexplicable) your understanding, the less irreflective (i.e. dogmatic, incorrigible) your criteria for judging and then, therefore, the less maladaptive (i.e. frustrating, immiserating, self-defeating) your agency becomes. — 180 Proof
It may not seem, immediately - one suffers any ill-effects, but so long as the lie is maintained as truth, then the clock is ticking on the cuckoos coming home to roost. — counterpunch
I've thought about this a lot, and my conclusion is that truth is useful in a far more fundamental and long term sense - whereas the lie is short term, and implies costs when falsified. — counterpunch
Logically yes, if the truthfulness is known but reality is rarely that way. We are presented with a barrage of information where we have to validate ourselves if they are truths or not. Aren't there believable lies and unbelievable truths? I guess my question is: can we know that we aren't believing in falsehoods? Can the liars you mention, be believing in falsehoods that they misinterpret as truths? — FlaccidDoor
Truth refers to many kinds of ideas so this is a pretty loose series of questions. — FlaccidDoor
Think of all the people with contradictory philosophies who are nevertheless completely convinced that they're the ones in the right, with everybody else being wrong. They're all lying to themselves, and believing the lies. Not lying that their view is the correct one, but lying that it must be the correct one. — noAxioms
I personally hold contradictory beliefs. I thus know that some of my beliefs cannot be correct, but one cannot simply will ones self to unbelieve something.
As for lies I tell others, I've never told my Mother that I've abandoned belief in God the way I was raised. What's the purpose in telling her that? She just doesn't need to worry that her child is going to hell, although I admit to having been at several funerals of vocal atheists where the mourners (and even the pastor) still comfort each other with words like "he's in a better place now", which is exactly a lie told for a purpose. — noAxioms
I was looking for answers which would make life endurance.
I am still inclined to think that finding 'truth' when we are searching for answers to all the big questions is connected to our psychological motivations. For many aspects of this, it is not as if truth is revealed easily, so it may be that we often perceive and think what we find helpful to make life meaningful. — Jack Cummins
I have moved on from the big fear of theism vs atheism and like to think that I am more impartial now. However, as a general principle, I do wonder about when we search in the world of ideas and explanations, what if we discovered truth which was simply horrific, beyond all worst possibilities? Would we fight against it and seek untruths instead? — Jack Cummins
Do you think we turn to falsehoods only because we are unprepared or scared to face the truths? — FlaccidDoor
I'm only disappointed you didn't also reach for the sceptical argument underlying utter epistemic relativism, and conclude by suggesting we can't actually KNOW anything! — counterpunch
*credible lies / — counterpunch
I think science now constitutes a highly valid and increasingly coherent understanding of the reality we inhabit — counterpunch
Nil points for repeating yourself. In fact, one demerit. — counterpunch
Painfully aware of how difficult it is to get anything done, I've sought to identify the key log - and it is limitless clean energy. It's the most scientifically fundamental approach - and the greatest good for the least cost, with least disruption. I can imagine fossil fuel producers freaking out at the very idea, but I would argue more energy gives us more time and discretion in the short to mid term, and would be applied to create sustainable markets in the long term. — counterpunch
Yes.Wouldn't then, truth having value as a criterion for judging ultimately be rooted in its usefulness in "improving" your agency? — FlaccidDoor
Truth seems to not be something relative to a person or a belief, so despite the fact that I hold what I would label as 'beliefs', I'm not so naive to assert that those beliefs correspond to truth.Why is believing in falsehoods not the equivalent of interpreting it as truths? If you believe it is real, convince yourself it is real, then to that person it is as if that is a truth. — FlaccidDoor
What about belief in specific god X? There's a lot of mutually contradictory X's from which to choose, and some of them must be falsehoods, yet belief in them leads the believer into leading a better life (sometimes) and leads them to fit better into their local community, which is definitely beneficial.truth is a statement or idea describing reality as is.
With this definition, would there be falsehoods that are more useful than truths? — FlaccidDoor
Think of all the people with contradictory philosophies who are nevertheless completely convinced that they're the ones in the right, with everybody else being wrong. They're all lying to themselves, and believing the lies. Not lying that their view is the correct one, but lying that it must be the correct one. — noAxioms
You use the word 'know' like 'believe' here. One can believe something (be certain about it even, which is the lying to which I refer), but true knowledge is seemingly out of reach because there is not enough data. The existence of alternate valid interpretations of things means there is no way to know which interpretation (if any) is the true one. No, such lying is due not to knowing something else is true, but to realizing that something else could be true.Wouldn't lying necessitate that you "know" something else is true? — FlaccidDoor
Oh I swallowed it completely at first, and was put in a Christian school that taught that science (evolution in particular) didn't contradict the teachings of the church. But then other churches began to deny science and force a choice, so I looked at both as objectively as I could, and the choice was pretty obvious to me. I've been on a search ever since to identify the biases I never thought to question and it has led to some less than mainstream conclusions, but not conclusions so strong that I'll make the mistake of asserting them as truth. Just higher on the probability scale (fewest unanswerd problems) than any other interpretation I've considered.I can relate pretty heavily to that. My family is Christian and growing up I could never swallow the ideas they threw at me ...
My example above, yes. I wrote that before seeing this.I've come to terms with it recently with pragmatism, in that believing in those Christian things have usefulness to them.
I wrote my post to explain the usefulness of truth, and you didn't read it before you replied. That's why you're confused - because you've made no effort to understand. Does the phrase "limitless clean energy" suggest windmills and solar panels? No, it does not. But thanks for the heads up on just how little impact my ideas have had. — counterpunch
I didn't think I was confused until now. Limitless clean energy does suggest windmills and solar panels unless it refers to nuclear energy. — FlaccidDoor
it is better to live the reality as it is — javi2541997
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.