Is Truth Invented or Discovered?

[Reconstructo]

Is truth made or found? Are philosophers/scientist inventors of tools or lifters of curtains?

[Deckard]

Originally Posted by Reconstructo

Is truth made or found? Are philosophers/scientist inventors of tools or lifters of curtains?

There are moments when I become part of the universe, I become part of the maze for others to explore, a wall, a door, a stairway. No, no, wait a second, I am not the wall, the door, the stairway, but rather I create the wall the door, the stairway - it is only natural for the creator to over-identify with his/her creation and this tendency to over-identify with ones creation is one of those hurdles the creators must overcome. Curtain lifters can only be scolded and scared away. Inventors can be judged. And those who judge will say: "How dare you further complicate this labyrinth!"

[amist]

The truth is found, information is created.

[Deckard]

Originally Posted by amist

The truth is found, information is created.

How does one tell the difference between information and truth?

[amist]

Simple, if it is indubitable, it is the truth(since truth implies certainty). Otherwise it's not necessarily true and merely information. Some information may be more valuable than other information but at the core of its being it is just that, merely information.

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by Reconstructo

Is truth made or found? Are philosophers/scientist inventors of tools or lifters of curtains?

If you think that someone invented the truth that the Nile is the longest river in Africa, you must think that it is not really a truth that the Nile is the longest river in Africa, but it is a lie. That is what it means to "invent a truth"; that it really is not a truth, but a lie. At least that is what it means in English. The phrase, "invented the truth" really means, 'invented the "truth"'

---------- Post added 02-09-2010 at 05:52 AM ----------

Originally Posted by amist

Simple, if it is indubitable, it is the truth(since truth implies certainty). Otherwise it's not necessarily true and merely information. Some information may be more valuable than other information but at the core of its being it is just that, merely information.

It may very well be true that La Paz is the capital of Bolivia, but I am not certain of it. It may be true that there is life on other planets, but do you know anyone who is certain that there is life on other planets? So how does truth imply certainty?

[Deckard]

Originally Posted by amist

Simple, if it is indubitable, it is the truth(since truth implies certainty). Otherwise it's not necessarily true and merely information. Some information may be more valuable than other information but at the core of its being it is just that, merely information.

So then does truth first present itself as mere information until it achieves certainty? Is it true before it was recognized as true or is it just information up until the moment when you realize that it is true?

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by Deckard

So then does truth first present itself as mere information until it achieves certainty? Is it true before it was recognized as true or is it just information up until the moment when you realize that it is true?

Truth never "achieves" certainty, since it really makes no sense to say of truth that it is certain. Although, of course, it makes sense to say that people are certain (or uncertain) of truths. I doubt that the Nile river became the longest river in Africa only when it was finally measured. What was it before it was measured?

If information is not true, it is hardly information. There is no information that the Nile is the shortest river in Africa.

[amist]

So how does truth imply certainty?

Truth must be certain because if it isn't absolutely certain, then it could be false. And you cannot call what could be false true, because that would be a direct contradiction. Sure there is some kind of objective truth out there somewhere but it's meaningless to talk about it seeing how limited we are as subjects. I'm speaking that in the epistemological sense, you cannot say anything is true which you do not know for certain.

Information is produced to make up for the lack of certainty/truth in the world.

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by amist

Truth must be certain because if it isn't absolutely certain, then it could be false. And you cannot call what could be false true, because that would be a direct contradiction. Sure there is some kind of objective truth out there somewhere but it's meaningless to talk about it seeing how limited we are as subjects. I'm speaking that in the epistemological sense, you cannot say anything is true which you do not know for certain.

Information is produced to make up for the lack of certainty/truth in the world.

Some truths (contingent truths) could be false. It is true that the Nile is the longest river in Africa, but it could be false. We could have discovered that another river is Africa is the longest river. In fact, although now unlikely, we could still discover we had made a mistake and that the Nile was not the longest river in Africa. But if it is true that the Nile is the longest river in Africa, it is true that it is the longest river in Africa. You seem to be confusing the two sentences: 1. It must be that if P is true, then P is true, with, 2. If P is true then P must be true. Sentence 1 is, of course true. But sentence 2. is false. Since there are many statement that are true, but which needn't be true. Another way of putting your mistake is that you seem to believe that all truths are necessary truths. But that is clearly false. Since that would mean there are no contingent truths, and there are many contingent truths. Like, the Nile is the longest river in Africa. Of course, if a statement is true, it is not false. But that does not mean that if a statement is true that it could not be false.