To suggest that there is no such thing as objective truth is not the same as suggesting there is no such thing as objective reality. Regardless of how we perceive reality, it must be granted that we are perceiving something, so an objective reality must exist. We may not be seeing how it really is, whatever that may be, or our perceptions may be fairly close to the mark, but in either case, there is the something to be perceived.
Truth, however, if defined as a conformity to fact or reality, must be subjectively judged to be so. The weight of the argument, therefore, would seem to be against the idea of objective truth that doesn't depend on other elements for comparison. Even if we were to take what seems to be a fundamental truth, such as "everything is exactly what it is," this concept can only exist in comparison to what things are not. Even when we're dealing with the fundamentals, then, we find that objective truth is difficult to support as an acceptable construct. All truth seems to be subjective.
A rock, for ages, stern and high, Stood frowning 'gainst the earth and sky, And never bowed his haughty crest When angry storms around him prest. Morn, springing from the arms of night, Had often bathed his brow with light. And kissed the shadows from his face With tender love and gentle grace.
Day, pausing at the gates of rest, Smiled on him from the distant West, And from her throne the dark-browed Night Threw round his path her softest light. And yet he stood unmoved and proud, Nor love, nor wrath, his spirit bowed; He bared his brow to every blast And scorned the tempest as it passed.
One day a tiny, humble seed-- The keenest eye would hardly heed-- Fell trembling at that stern rock's base, And found a lowly hiding-place. A ray of light, and drop of dew, Came with a message, kind and true; They told her of the world so bright, Its love, its joy, and rosy light, And lured her from her hiding-place, To gaze upon earth's glorious face.
So, peeping timid from the ground, She clasped the ancient rock around, And climbing up with childish grace, She held him with a close embrace;
Her clinging was a thing of dread; Where'er she touched a fissure spread, And he who'd breasted many a storm Stood frowning there, a mangled form; A Truth, dropped in the silent earth, May seem a thing of little worthless, Till, spreading round some mighty wrong, It saps its pillars proud and strong, And o'er the fallen ruin weaves The brightest blooms and fairest leaves.
Flee fro the prees1 and dwelle with sothfastnesse; Suffyce unto thy thyng2, though it be smal, For hord hath hate, and climbing tikalnesse3, Prees hath envye, and wele4 blent5 overal. Savour no more than thee bihove shal, Reule wel thyself that other folk canst rede, And trouth thee shal delivere, it is no drede6.
Tempest thee nought al croked7 to redresse In trust of hir8 that turneth as a bal; Gret reste stant in litel besiness. Bewar therfore to sporne9 ayeyns10 an al11, Stryve not, as doth the crokke12 with the wal. Daunte13 thyself, that dauntest otheres dede14, And trouth thee shal delivere, it is no drede.
That thee is sent, receyve in buxumnesse15; The wrastling for this world axeth16 a fal. Her is non hoom, her nis but wildernesse: Forth, pilgrim, forth! Forth, beste, out of thy stal! Know thy contree, look up, thank God of al; Hold the heye wey and lat thy gost thee lede, And trouth thee shal delivere, it is no drede.
Therfore, thou Vache, leve thyn old wrecchednesse; Unto the world leve now to be thral. Crye him mercy, that of his hy goodnesse Made thee of noght, and in especial Draw unto him, and pray in general For thee, and eek for other, hevenlich mede17; And trouth thee shal delivere, it is no drede.
1 the prees: the press (perhaps, the crowd at court) 2 thyng: possessions 3 tikalnesse: ticklishness, uncertainty 4 wele: weal 5 blent: blinds 6 drede: doubt 7 croked: crookedness 8 hir: i.e. Lady Fortune (who turns her wheel) 9 sporne: kick 10 ayeyns: against 11 al: awl (which would be painful to kick against) 12 crokke: crock, which would break if thrown against a wall 13 Daunte: conquer 14 dede: deeds 15 buxumnesse: obedience 16 Vache: a pun: either Sir Philip de la Vache, a member of the court, or, a cow 16 axeth: asks 17 mede: reward
This is the last line of text in this writeup.
Truth. Such a cute, innocent word to look at. Such noble word to live by. Yet, possessing the power to drown the strongest, the noblest and the wisest of all men - should one have lost it somewhere along the way - is certainly something to take seriously.
The problem with the word arises from its subjective nature. Take the first sentence in this writeup, for example. At the time of writing it was the truth as it really was the last line of this writeup, but now anyone could call me a liar for writing something such; there's still a lot of text in this writeup after that first line. This leads us to but one conclusion: truth must - in some cases - be time-related. Or belief-related, or physics-related ("the accuracy of our knowledge of the world is limited by the sensitivity of the equipment used to determine and measure", as I stated in my writeup From books people learn to remember, from mistakes to understand), depending on the case.
The subjective nature of the way the word is understood (do keep in mind that words do not have any meanings, whatsoever, by themselves, see my writeup on the subject) is not the problem, it's us people that are the problem, when trying to enforce our own truths on others, who are not willing to give up theirs. The history of Man is full of sad examples of what this can lead up to: Conquistadors, Inquisition, Holocaust, just to name a few.
Creativity is close to madness, they say. Ingenuity is close to madness, they also say. Does this mean that creativity is close to ingenuity, then? If so, why is the creativity of some called just plain creativity, while the creativity of others is called ingenuity? Does creativity or madness or ingenuity even exist? What makes me write something like this? I'll tell you: it's creativity. So, am I lying, then? The one who absolutely positively, without the smallest of room for the slightest doubt, proves it is a genius. Thus, he lies and all I'm writing is true.
And that's about all I have to say about truth right now.
A tragically underappreciated album by Jeff Beck, and one of the most important seminal works of heavy metal and hard rock. Released in 1968. Along with some Led Zeppelin and Cream (all ex-Yardbirds, fancy that!), it represents the increasingly tenuous link between blues and heavy metal. Even if the music on Truth weren't so stunningly good, the album would be notable for the number of rock and roll gods that appear on it. If you're impressed by the credits on the album cover:
A few notes I've managed to dredge up: The "geezer" who wrote Let Me Love you was "J. Rod", I dunno who that is. The recording on Led Zeppelin I of You Shook Me was done very shortly after the one on Truth, which Jimmy Page sat in on. Beck's Bolero was written by Jimmy Page, and features all of Beck, Page, Keith Moon, John Paul Jones, and Nicky Hopkins - oh, to be a fly on the wall at THAT recording session! The drum part was inspired by Ravel's Bolero. Blues Deluxe is not live at all - the applause was recorded at a Beatles concert.
In our personal lives, is it better to be diplomatic or to tell the truth?
Deontology and Utilitarianism
There are two major philosophical views on the subject of truth. Deontology states that duty is a key ethical concept that cannot be defined in terms of what is good or beneficial. Hence, deontologists maintain one must do one's duty even if the consequences of this action would be detrimental to oneself or others. On the other hand, utilitarianism expresses the view that the best action is the one that will provide the greatest expected utility, or happiness, to the greatest number of individuals.
Trust
In order for our society to function, people must trust each other to a reasonable extent. When people tell the truth, it establishes trust. If no one told the truth, there would be no reason to listen to what anyone had to say. Communication would break down and without communication, society could not function. Therefore, for society to maintain itself, people must tell the truth.
Communication and Altruism
One of the main reasons for telling the truth is in order to establish reliable communication, which enables society to function better. There are, however, other reasons why telling the truth is a moral ideal common to all human societies. Telling the truth will not usually provide any benefit to the individual. Therefore, being truthful will, in general, lead to the avoidance of actions motivated by self-interest, whereas lying is more likely to promote greed and the desire for personal gain. Telling the truth is an easy way to adhere to the deontological principle of doing the right thing for its own sake.
Is telling the truth always justified?
Deontology states that a morally obligatory act is one enjoined by a system of moral duties. There is much variation between the moral codes of different cultures, but nevertheless most of them would agree that it is essential to tell the truth. Although, there are other moral laws shared universally by human cultures, deontologists state that people should tell the truth all the time. However, telling the truth cannot always be morally justified, for instance few would claim that those families who revealed the location of Jews in their village to the Nazis were acting morally. If there is a higher moral law, such as justice, or a higher natural law, such as survival, involved, then it is morally acceptable to lie to uphold that principle.
Lying as a moral choice
Since society can still function as long as most people tell the truth most of the time, lying can be an acceptable moral choice. People do not necessarily have to tell the truth all the time; they just have to be truthful enough so that people can usually accept what they hear as truth when there is no obvious reason for the person to be lying.
Trust can still be maintained if people lie when they have something worthwhile to gain from doing so, but if people lie when they have nothing to gain, a person could depend on reliable information from no one but himself. On the other hand, if people were to tell the truth almost all the time, even when it were inconvenient to them, communication would yield huge amounts of reliable information that could be useful to people in many different ways. If people always told the truth, we would never have any doubts to the validity of information, and could use everything we heard as verified fact.
Detecting deceitfulness
However, this extreme is unnecessary, we can trust one another to tell the truth most of the time. Usually, we can detect deceitfulness by taking into account what we feel about the
