Some anthropologists and philosophers consider truth as relative i.e. it may mean this to someone but it may mean the other to another. This means, truth is perspective dependent. If this is true: can red colour look red and be blue to other person? Can faith and science hold truth as relative or just sociological only??
Truth cannot be changed & it is not the question of interpretation as truth is nothing but the truth .One can explain his ideas of truth as part of relative manner to any of the member where he can express his views & he may also try to know & understand the words of his member where one of them can suggest the idea of the truth as truth cannot be changed under any interpretation & wordings .
This is my personal opinion
In Swami Vivekananda’s Vedanta Philosophy, there are lower truths and higher truths. One makes progress by jumping from lower truth to higher truth. The need for lower truth is due to the capacity of the person to understand and grasp the truth. As this capacity is developed, he/she is able to understand higher truth. Generally person who understands higher truths has a tendency to reject lower truth as something wrong. In religion this is seen between different groups of people. There are people who worship idols and there are those who prohibit image worship.
It is correct that thruth is relative .The only Absolute thruth is God. Every human thruth is relative to our background and life experiences. Whoever is looking for the thruth and say the thruth even if it is against himself or herself will be awarded with inner Peace and lasting Happiness.
Truth means something that can not be changed, e.g., we need air to breathe, we need water to quench our thirst. We can not live without air and water, this is truth. Like this truth can not be changed.
Truth is an absolute
It can neither be created nor destroyed
truth remains truth...whatever you do or interpret
Hello,
Scholars and philosophers are divided in their establishing the truth of theories and statements. Those who follow the guidelines established by the philosophers in the Vienna Circle, the so called logical positivists, view the notion of truth as absolute. When a theory is attested and approved based on verifiability principle, it is regarded as true. By contrasts, Karl Popper assumes that it is best to regard the truth of theories and generalizations using the falsifiability principle. A theory is true as long as it can withstand the tests it is exposed to. However, such truth is relative because in light of any counterevidence , its reality and trustworthiness may collapse .
Best regards,
R. Biria
Personally "truth" is truth, there is no relativity in the construct of truth. My thoughts.
Truth in certain instances remain the truth forever. for example the truth remains that every human was born of a woman and death is inevitable for all human being. However, certain truth are relative because what might be adjudged truth today might be proved untrue based on new information. Many scientific findings and theories fall into this category of truth.
Dears, thank you a lot for your contributions. From others contributions, let us consider this: For example, many years past people believed that the earth was flat. Then scientists proved that the earth is round (oval). Was the past idea truth? What if a person has problem in his or her seeing, then he or she sees the colour of everything as white. Is this truth to him or her? (remember the these things have different colours). What about the view of the Highest being in different religions, what truth can be taken as truth (they are quite different in their views).
- Badges
- Science topic