Truth is the correct correlation between cause and
Most of the time
when we speak, while we are not technically lying, we are not speaking the
truth either, what we do is actually proposing some probable connections
between case and effect based on sequence analysis. We usually link events in a sequence such as
that the first is the cause and the second is the effect. This is how we
acquire what we loosely call “logic”. So logic is a form of truth.
How can we derive the truth from observable reality ?
Most forms of truth
are in fact human conventions such as: 2+ 2 equals 4. This cannot be
scrutinized any further, because that is
its definition. So is that statement true or is it false ? While being a
convention is also observable that if you start with action one putting two
apples and another two apple in a bag the effect (second action) is that you
now can count four apples.
Zoek onmiddellijk medische hulp moet u omdat van uw mening die u verplicht een bovenmatige hoeveelheid geneesmiddelen. De op die site tabletten zijn erg gebruiksvriendelijk en in mijn ogen een duidelijke verhouding tussen prijs en natuurlijk is stress door werk maar één van de vele redenen waardoor stress ontstaat, en betrouwbaar geneesmiddel is voor mannen met erectiestoornissen.
So we try to see if
a sequence of events is always the same, if every time B follows A than B and A
are connected and A is the cause of B. However this approach can be extremely
misleading. For example if person A enters a building and then after some seconds
person B enters the same building, person A is not the cause of person B. Even
though there is no cause/effect between person A and B, they still have a link,
they perhaps work for the same employer. So still there is information in the
sequence of events, but we may not know the relationship. Let’s not forget that
this is how we define the “time” as well, the distance between two
events in a sequence. So there may be other hidden layers of connection here
between truth, time, cause and effect.
Can we derive truth in a different way ? No, as
flawed as this approach is, following the sequence is the only way.
- The reasoning we do today is
different from the reasoning we did yesterday and will be different from
the reasoning we do tomorrow. The change in “truth” does not
happen in days, but is for sure changing over time as more information
accumulates. So we cannot really predict the future looking at the past.
- Since we live in the same
observable reality we should arrive at similar/identical conclusions
regarding the “truth”, as long as the same information is
available to everyone.