55 posts in this topic

Not forced... You have to think. It is true for you that we're typing. But it is actually a fact that we're having a conversation, not that you are typing. Because see... you could be a robot. I wouldn't know that. So you are not you... you may be a robot. But for you it is true that YOU are typing, but for me, that may not be true.

But if I were to realize I'm not typing, it wouldn't be true to me either, would it? Just because something is held as true doesn't imply its true anymore than something is held as fact implies its fact. The implication is that language is all subjective, and not objective, which I don't agree with and I don't think has anything to do with the word "true."

What is true is you can talk about things like "slightly true", "kinda true", while you can't talk about things like "slightly factual." But you can also say something is "absolutely true", and something absolutely true is no different than a fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a forced definition. Its true that I'm typing out a response to you, and its a fact that I'm typing out a response to you, mean pretty much the same thing, and neither statement is a misuse of the word 'truth' or 'fact'. Both are correct language. The words have different connotation, but most of the time have the same denotation.

I have to agree that a fact may be overlapped by a truth. But in this case I think it becomes truth due to the fact that it is perceived personally by someone or by others, who can attest that it is actually a fact.

So we have an agreement, I think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree that a fact may be overlapped by a truth. But in this case I think it becomes truth due to the fact that it is perceived personally by someone or by others, who can attest that it is actually a fact.

So we have an agreement, I think?

I think truth has more to do with the rightness of a statement, where fact has to do with the rightness of what a statement is referring to. But that can pretty much mean the same thing. If a statement is wrong, its wrong. Language can also be right in some contexts, and wrong in other contexts, depending on what the word is used to mean. In that case, its true in one context and not in another. Its just a difference of grammar, in the end. And that's all that it is, imo, grammar.

Anyway I think this is getting off topic from the thread , don't want to scare others off the original topic.

There have been a lot of Western philosophers who have critiqued the Eastern point of view though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think truth has more to do with the rightness of a statement, where fact has to do with the rightness of what a statement is referring to. But that can pretty much mean the same thing. If a statement is wrong, its wrong. Language can also be right in some contexts, and wrong in other contexts, depending on what the word is used to mean. In that case, its true in one context and not in another. Its just a difference of grammar, in the end. And that's all that it is, imo, grammar.

Anyway I think this is getting off topic from the thread , don't want to scare others off the original topic.

There have been a lot of Western philosophers who have critiqued the Eastern point of view though.

Ok then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread Cleaned

Please try to keep things civil. We all know religion is a touchy subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.