The difference between Reality and Truth
Reality is the actual state of things independent of our minds whereas “truth” is merely a perception of reality. The closer that perception aligns with reality, the more true it is, but as all perceptions are subjective and incomplete, so is “truth”.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
The statements you are making are your perceptions...therefore they are subjective and incomplete.
Exactly!
So how can we even assume they are true? How can anything be true? Wouldn't this lead to the conclusion that there is no truth, or at least not an attainable truth by human beings? Then what would be the point?
If everybody has their own "truths", then that leads to relativism. And relativism is self-refuting.
You should not assume my statements are true! You should not assume anyone’s statements are true. Nor should you assume your own experiences are in line with reality for you could have imagined or misperceived something etc.
First, back to “truth”. Truth is a concept. It does not exist outside of us. You cannot point to “truth” in nature as we can a tree. The point I was trying to make in my post is that truth is as close as we can get to reality but because it is filtered through our senses and tainted by our subjective nature we end up with a compromised picture of reality.
This is not to say we should give up trying to understand reality but simply understand that we will always have a flawed idea of it. This is healthy to recognize for it makes us more compassionate— more tolerant. When we are sure we possess the Truth we are likely to be less tolerant and less compassionate. We might even burn heretics, bomb abortion centers or slaughter 6 million Jews.
Luckily most of the time we get by just fine with our senses. We know to look both ways before crossing a street because the truth is that you will get hurt if hit by a truck. Trouble starts when people have conflicting ideas of what is real/true. Such as in a court of law. So we use evidence to help figure out which story is closest to reality.
Religious belief is another area which produces conflict. The Christian says the Muslim is destined for Christian Hell and the Muslim says the Christian is destined for Muslim Hell. How should we determine which person has the story that best aligns with reality? Evidence! It so happens that there is no evidence to support either person’s “Truth” so we can dismiss them both.
I do believe we all have our own “truth”. This does not mean we all have an accurate understanding of reality! Your “truth” that Jesus is God might be right. The Muslim’s “truth” that Jesus is not God might be right. Even though you are both convinced of your “truth” at least one of you is wrong. How do we get the best understanding of reality? Evidence. Again, there is compelling evidence to suggest both of you are wrong and your “truth” is better understood as delusion, or more charitably-false beliefs.
Thankfully, reality remains reality no matter what are perception of it.
I would suggest constructing a mental probability scale. On the far left is the words “very unlikely”. The far right has the words “very likely”. Between the two are shades of those extremes. All notions should be placed in the middle and then moved one way or the other depending on the supporting evidence. So when the atheist, Christian and Muslim put “Santa” on their charts they quickly move that idea to “very unlikely”. When the atheist puts “Jesus” and “Allah” on they also slide down right next to Santa because he sees no more evidence for either one than he does for Santa. But why does the Christian and Muslim slide “Allah” one way and “Jesus” the other? Surely they are not both looking objectively at the same evidence or lack there of and coming to opposite conclusions. There must be something else going on here. It seems they are basing there decisions not on evidence (a careful study of comparative religions, psychological reasons for belief in god(s), etc,) but because they “believe” their religion is true and “believe” the other is false. Obviously, belief does not get us closer to truth. Only evidence does that.
But why is there a reality if there is nothing to know it? Where did this reality come from? Why do we all have differing perceptions, what creates that? Why does everyone see something differently instead of seeing it the same? And how do we know there really is a reality if no one knows it? Maybe there's a person out there who has, is, or will exist and he knew, knows, or will know the real reality, and that's how we know there is a reality.
K: But why is there a reality if there is nothing to know it?
J: We certainly can and do know at least a portion of reality. But no one knows why there is reality.
K: Where did this reality come from?
J: We know the “Big Bang” event some 13 billion years ago created space and time and all matter.
But don’t yet know what brought that about.
K: Why do we all have differing perceptions, what creates that?
J: Because we are not machines but fallible creatures both our input and processing (impacted by our individual experiences) of reality is different.
K: Why does everyone see something differently instead of seeing it the same?
J: See above
K:And how do we know there really is a reality if no one knows it?
J: We can experience it—test it, taste it, feel it, etc. It is possible that it is all a dream, some Matrix-like delusion but I would put that possibility on the far end of the probability scale next to Santa, Allah and God. We may not be able to fully grasp it all but we can grasp enough of it to be very meaningful to us.
K: Maybe there's a person out there who has, is, or will exist and he knew, knows, or will know the real reality, and that's how we know there is a reality.
J: I don’t think there is much of a question that there is a reality. The task is to understand it as fully and deeply as we can. That goal makes everyday exciting.
Post a Comment