User:JREverest/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge/Seminar group 5/Truth

Introduction

Truth is a concept which is very difficult to define, as it encompasses themes such as reality, the meaning of existence, religion -themes which are highly controversial- and is the origin of perhaps every divergence of opinion (each side claiming that they are the voice of truth).

Let's look at a quick definition of truth by the Oxford English dictionary: 'the quality or state of being true'. First, what is true? How do you know something is true? One usually thinks of finding evidence, proof that something is true or not. But the problem is, can one prove that something is not true? If the evidence enables one to do so. But in the case of reality, can one prove that something does not exist? Philosophically speaking, it's not so easy to do so. But, let's continue the definition:

'that which is true or in accordance with facts and reality'. this is more precise. This definition suggests that the truth must have a link with reality or facts, i.e. something that is undeniable. Admittedly, one can interpret facts differently -often towards what one wants to believe- and statistics, data, are to be taken cautiously (there are numbers behind numbers, sources to be verified), and are to be debated (the perfect example of this is the debate around climate change). Nevertheless, truth has a basis which is common and which everyone should have access to (through knowledge).

Third part of the definition: 'A fact or belief that is accepted as true'. This suggests that truth can be relative, but also that there are common truths that cannot be denied nor can be proved, like a 'common knowledge' but without the knowledge part. This means that truth would exist by consensus. If truth is relative, than it is not universal (only the concept of truth would be common to all, but not its applications).

The theories of Truth

The consensus theory of truth

This theory suggests that there is no objective truth, truth is what we decide on as a community. This point of view is interesting because it shows once more that the truth is supposed to be universal, common to all. It is mostly based on the agreements reached by scientists upon controversial subjects such as reality. However, it is quite hard to reach a universal agreement upon an idea, therefore very few ideas have received a universal consensus. Furthermore, seeing as truth by consensus is derived through our innate social/group self many issues can arise. There may be a bias towards a truth favoring more powerful or influential members and certain members may also simply abide to the consensus due to the human social behavior of conformity, thus a truth by census may be misleadingly reliable as its widespread agreement may hide some of its biases.

This theory was first problematized by Habermas, who suggests that such a consensus can only be reached by primarily determining a set of common values. This theory of truth by consensus is highly philosophical -in fact, Habermas had read Kant beforehand in order to define how the people should consent to this truth by selfish majority (saying, some minorities will be left behind). For Kant 'everything you do should be justifiable as though it was a manifestation of a universal law' (to quote Alan Wilson's words in Knowledge Power). Kant, in Critique of Judgement, exposes two different imperatives:

• the categorical imperative: the thing (chosen as true) is good in itself. Example: 'You shall not kill'
• the hypothetical imperative: the subject is more active because the purpose of the statement (chosen as true) is good, but the statement is not necessarily good in itself. Example: You should brush your teeth (subsequently: so that you don't get caries).

Habermas adds one more:

• the actual consent: puts the emphasis on communication. In Habermas's model 'values are determined through an evolutionary process of social interaction' (Alan Wilson's words in Knowledge Power).

The engagement is very important in this theory, and consequently one can claim that knowledge and the truth (which are heavily intertwined) are both socially produced. We have a 'critical responsibility to dig deep' (Alan Wilson, Knowledge Power), to doubt and question statements using one's intellect in order to make society a fairer place. It is a rather positive theory which suggests that the people can order itself thanks to its own knowledge, without the need of a Leviathan (Thomas Hobbes), a totalitarian state.

The Correspondence Theory of truth

The correspondence theory of truth states that we should judge the veracity of a statement accordingly to its adequacy with reality and the phenomenons we are experiencing in other words:

• the proposition x is true if and only if x corresponds to some fact.

• x is false if and only if x does not correspond to a fact.

For example, saying that ice melts when it is out of the freezer is true according to this theory as it is what happens in reality. A problem that emerges with this wording though is that everything that does not directly correspond to a fact is automatically false. An apple would be false for example following this theory. This is why it is possible to use another theory:

• x is true if and only if x corresponds to some state of affairs that obtains
• x is false if and only if x corresponds to some state of affairs that does not obtain

This theory acknowledges the existence of any state of affairs without saying they are true or false. It just states that in our reality, as long as it doesn't obtain, it is false. But it could exist in another reality.

This theory of truth can be used in science, when making observations during an experiment. It can also be used in law for example. It is also widely used accepted in everyday life because it is quite obvious,no one has ever needed to question it. But one of its problems is that it leaves some domains out: the domains where there are no 'facts'. For example, in moral, there are no facts to which a statement can correspond. Therefore, following this theory, there are no moral truths. The same applies to logic. There are no 'logical facts' therefore there are no logical truths following this theory. These truths also cannot be used to demonstrate anything.

Other objections to this theory are:

• to judge if something is true, we use our perception. Or we can never know for sure that our perceptions are accurate, otherwise we wouldn't need the concept of true and false in the first place. This means we can never be sure what we are perceiving corresponds to the reality and can therefore never state anything as being true with certainty.
• In addition to that, we could also say that it is not even possible to compare our perception of the world and a fact since they are not of the same nature. It is then impossible to say whether they correspond or not.

The Coherence Theory of Truth

The coherence theory of truth is a part of idealism and as such contrasts and rejects the correspondence theory (a constituent of metaphysical realism) in that it accounts the truth of a proposition in the relation between that proposition and another set of (specified) proportions, thus unlike in correspondence truths cannot be viewed as objective features of the world and only as truths in coherence between other propositions we believe. Despite this, like correspondence, coherence does provide a substantive conception of truth. Coherence presents truth exclusively within a system, and not beyond it, a system where the essential features of coherence and consistency are sufficient for a truth.

Coherence is not present as one unified theory, rafter it has diverged into a various versions that differ on the grounds of the coherence relation and the set(s) of propositions that hold these coherent truths. Earlier versions have held truth to be simply a matter of consistency across the set of propositions, however this view encountered issues in explaining propositions from unspecified sets. Further ideas have viewed the coherence relation as a type of logical entailment, thus, a proposition is held coherent with another set of propositions when it logically follows/adheres to the previous members of the set. Further theories have defined it as a mutual explanatory support held between the propositions in a set of beliefs. Furthermore, while coherentists agree that the specified set of propositions is believed or held to be true, however where different theories differ is on who believes the propositions and when. Some coherentists see this set as beloved by actual people, whereas others see it as beloved by some omniscient being, while a moderate position sees these propositions as being beloved by a group of people that have reached the end of some inquiry. Despite being defended by philosophers like Immanuel Kant, like previous theories of truth current ideas still face challenges, despite this coherence provides a contrast to correspondence that may be best applied in subjective fields such as the humanities and the arts.

The Pragmatic Theory of Truth

The pragmatic theory of truth states that something is true if it is useful and proves profitable to us. The Pragmatist believes we try out our theories and models to validate truth; for example, we use technology to prove and test ideas pragmatically, and we look for medical treatments that cure patients. These practical consequences and results of a theoretical concept give us a reason to trust it, and thus we consider it as 'truth'. The Pragmatic theory of truth can also be applied to personal truths. For example, one may believe that money is the most important aspect in his life. For person A, the belief is true and useful since, the person's actions in life will be guided by this belief; he will prioritize his financial situation over everything, look for the highest paying job, and set his life goal to be as rich as he can be. This belief is useful for this person, and to him, it brings him benefit. However, this may not be true for others. Another person, person B, may think that having a social life, or having lots of friends is the most important aspect in life. This belief also proves useful, and like the first person, actions will be taken in order to fulfill that belief. Person B will look for every opportunity to socialize with new people, make new friends, and network. We may not necessarily agree with either beliefs, but the pragmatist still holds it as true as it has given each person a meaning or purpose to life. In other words, it has proven to be useful and profitable.

Logical Truth

Logical truth is a truth that has been demonstrated through logic rules. There are many ways to demonstrate something with logic. An easy way is through as syllogism: If I have A and that A implies B then I have B. For example: I have a door. All doors open, therefore my door opens.

Logical truths are widely used in sciences like maths or physics for example to demonstrate new theorems or laws. They are also widely used in philosophy and in any field where it is needed to build an argument like debating or in law for example.

The problem with logical truths is that it is easy to come to false conclusions in the correspondence theory but that are still correctly true if one of the premises is false or simply of the logical laws are misused. For example it is logically correct to say all humans are green, I am human therefore I am green. Because the premise 'all humans are green' is false and doesn't correspond to reality, the conclusion 'I am green' is false because it doesn't correspond to reality even though it is logically true.

Post-truth

Introduction

"Post-truth" is a concept raised in politics referring to the phenomenon that sometimes the comprehension and reaction of the public overweigh the facts. In other words, people may be "intentionally misled" due to an injudicious way of processing information, which is regarded as an "manipulation" that confuses individual judgement and devastates the democratic system. According to an investigation into technology companies, even small groups of individuals are probably capable of influencing election result by potentially propagating their opinions.

Besides the social context we are faced with, there are two main drivers of the "post-truth" age:

1. The influence of social media: It is investigated that people are enjoying an easy access to various kinds of information through social media such as Facebook and Twitter rather than traditional media like television. Because of an increasingly important role of new-type social media and communication apps in our life, the spreading of rumors and misinformation can become more pervasive.
2. Big data analysis: The Internet has almost penetrated every aspect of our life. Locations, activities, payments, browsing history and comments of are all recorded by various kinds of applications. Due to the popularity of social media and relative technology, big data of the public is widely collected and effectively analyzed. After profiling and analyzing, the supply side even has the ability to provide processed "truth" to our terminals and influence in an unconscious but unappreciated way.

Reactions:

The emergence of "post-truth" calls for the action of the government and the society to secure our shared value and judicious judgement. Some ideas are raised as below:

• For the mass media (the supply side): On one hand, the government should strengthen their regulation on the content and spreading over any platforms, and it is strongly suggested that a reliable set of standards on different verification levels should be created to help the public judge the veracity of the sources. On the other hand, tech companies should shoulder the responsibility to create an environment where everyone may keep their right of knowing the facts and making individual judgement.
• For the consumers and receivers (the demand side): Whether "truth" emerging from human society can be free of value remains controversial. In terms of the public as the receivers, it is also advocated that people should be trained to be more critical in their approach to information. And to achieve this goal, both educational institutions and knowledge professionals like librarians can make their contribution.

The constructivist epistemology theory of truth

This theory of truth implies that the world is external to human minds but that the knowledge we have about that world is purely socially and humanely constructed. This theory is therefore opposed to the idea of an objective truth, that human beings could actually learn about exteriority (i.e. 'what I am not', exteriority is an important concept in philosophy) like the world around them (nature) and even about other human beings (culture).

There is no truth but the one humans create socially. It emphasizes the importance of empiricism, because humans develop their knowledge of the world (and its meaning) by experiencing it. This is why this theory of truth is also a philosophy of education: it encourages children and students to make their own experiences of the world.

If knowledge is based on humans experiencing the world (nature), than knowledge and the truth would be 'natural', and therefore would not be socially and humanely produced. It is culture which defines human beings (Descartes and his mechanical animals theory, Discourse on the Method), by history, art, religion, work, technique, and language -which are, in philosophy, the typical human products.

Truth in the Disciplines

The Truth in Art

Truth in Paintings

Thomas d’Aquinas (1225-1274) define the truth as ‘the conformity of the intellect and things’. By that, he means that a statement can be considered as true if it corresponds to what happened, if it corresponds to the reality. Art is a useful tool to communicate a message, an idea, to simplify something that can be very complex, or to help understand a situation more clearly. Art plays with the emotion and the sensibility of the public to reach them, and proved itself really efficient. Tess Flanders said in 1911 ‘Use a picture. It’s worth a thousand words’. Therefore, by playing with our emotions, art has the power to control the truth and what we believe in. The truth can be then deviated from its original meaning, from the reality, and with the aim to create a new reality, a new truth.

The first art movements in Europe, whether it is the Ancient Art (-900; +300), the Middle Ages (1200) and the Renaissance (1500), have in common this desire to reproduce reality with a special attention to proportions, perspective, the right balance and emphasizes on beauty. Mannerism is the following art movement born around 1520 in reaction to those principles and break the rules of traditional art. It does so by emphasizing on asymmetrical structure (amplify the proportion, preference for unnatural position or environment) and do not take into account perspective.  In opposition with the clarity and harmony of the earliest art work, Mannerism is more interested in in-conformity and in creating an emotional misunderstanding. There is no wish of representing the reality and telling the truth any more. However, because the artwork does not deliberately represent the exact reality, it doesn’t mean that it is not saying the truth. It’s a different truth, a sensible and not objective representation which is telling a new truth. Jacopo Tintoretto is an Italian painter who shaped the Mannerist style. In ‘Il Paradiso’, Tintoretto represents an overcrowded heaven and multiplies the perspectives. He is breaking with the traditional portrayal of paradise. Benvenuto Cellini’s ‘Cellini Salt Cellar’ is also one of the main work of Mannerism, representing Amphitrite and Poseidon in an uncomfortable position and disproportionate.

Truth in Cinema

The French cinema had a great importance during the Second World War for being the tool of government in the communication of collaborationist ideas. Cinema has created a new reality of France during the collaboration period by embellishing it or modifying the facts to justify the actions of the Vichy government. In 1971, ‘The sorrow and the pity’ by Marcel Ophüls minimizes the collaboration to preserve the ‘national unity’ during this context of tension. He contributed to the strengthening of ‘the sword and shield thesis’, positioning the Marechal Pétain as an ally of General Charles De Gaulle. As a result, the truth about the collaboration is being rewritten and seeks to change the interpretation of the events of 1940-1944.

Truth in Literature

Truth in creative nonfiction: When writing in any sub-genre of creative non fiction, the author signs an implicit pact with his readers and promises to tell the truth. Therefore, the concept of truth is central to creative nonfiction. Unlike fiction, where the reader knows that what he is about to read is mostly invented arbitrarily by the author, we only read creative nonfiction because of its historical reality, with facts that can be checked and evidence that there is a real correspondence between fiction and reality.

This is why learning that creative nonfiction author has lied in his books has great consequences, like James Frey for example, who had a successful career until people discovered he had lied in his writings. This caused him to get kicked out of Oprah Winfrey's book club and for his publisher to drop him . But sometimes it is hard for an author to tell the complete truth about something, especially in an autobiography about their early lives, for multiple reasons:

1. First of all, their memory might be faulty. They can either have completely forgotten about something, or be completely convinced that something happened when in fact it has not.
2. The way the author has experienced something might also differ from what really happened. Some experiences are so subjective that they could not be told in the exact same way by two people who nonetheless witnessed the exact same scene.
3. Finally, in the process of romanticizing their lives, which they have to go through as they cannot simply write facts after facts, without any analepsis or links between them, they might get too far from reality and the truth.

Truth in fiction: At first view, people often consider that there is no truth in fiction, that the whole point of fiction is to accept what the author tells us and never question whether it is true or false . But it is possible to question this statement. First of all, even though they are not factually true, in the sense that they do not relate stories that have happened to real people, literature, like many forms of art, can tend to show panels or dimensions of truth through lies and fiction. We can see this through the realism and naturalism movements that were very influential in the end of the 19th century.

In addition to that, we can say that literature depicts emotions and nature as close to reality as possible. In that sense, we can say that is tries to be truthful to what would happen in similar situations in reality. It creates a sense of reality so that the reader can connect with the characters and live fiction as if they were in the characters' skins.

Finally, in many fiction narratives, authors switch from the descriptive narrative to an essay style and include some general truths about life or humanity that can be considered as statements and therefore be questioned as true or false. They are usually philosophical statements that are mostly directed to the reader so that he begins a reflection on the world of his own. Therefore, we can say that fiction does contain some truths.

Truth in Mathematics and Logic

Until the 19th century, mathematicians only believed in one form of geometry (Euclidean geometry). Therefore, up until the introduction of non-Euclidean geometries such as hyperbolic geometry, there was no doubt for many about the objective truth of Euclidean mathematics; in fact, Immanuel Kant attributed our knowledge of Euclidean geometry to an innate sense of space. However, as soon as we had several geometries at our disposal, it became very difficult to determine without any form of proof which form was 'truer' than the rest. This was one of the first examples of the field of mathematics shifting its attention from absolute to relative truth.

Around the same time that non-Euclidian geometry was introduced, Boolean logic and algebra was being developed, having been named after George Boole. Boolean logic employs an system founded in binary opposition in which arbitrary variables can be given either the value 1 (represented by T for true) or 0 (represented by F for false). Operations in Boolean algebra fall under 3 categories: not, or, and and. The not function inverses the T or F variables to the other binary alternative. Regarding or and and operations, the or function defines outputs as true as long as at least one variable is T, whereas, conversely, the and function defines an output as 'true' only when all the variables are T. These operations are often displayed in 'truth tables' which allow us to compute the value of an output, based upon the provided axioms.

Types of Mathematical Truth

Model Theory of Truth - this term was coined by Alfred Tarski and Robert Vaught in 1956 as an amendment to the former's previous truth theory which he developed in 1933. The model theoretical truth is based upon a three symbol system: logical constants, variables and contextual symbols which only have meaning in application. Essentially, model theory deals with semantic ideas of truth expressed in a formal language via syntax and mathematical logic. Tarski believed that the truth contained in a sentence given in a formal language could not be unlocked in that same language, and thus a metalanguage containing elements of the object is required.

Proof Theory of Truth - the proof theory was developed by David Hilbert in 1922. The main premise of this theory is that proofs should be expressed in formal mathematical language, thus allowing for easier analysis by means of mathematical methods. Therefore, it can be considered to be syntactical, whereas the model theory is based upon semantic reasoning. Hilbert proposed that there was no such thing as an unsolvable problem, although Kurt Gödel countered this with his 'Incompleteness Theorems', the first of which declaring that any sufficiently expressive mathematical system must be either incomplete or inconsistent. Inconsistency implies that you can verify both a claim and that very claim's opposing statement, and according to Gödel's Second Incompleteness Theorem, if a system is perceived to be consistent, the system itself cannot verify this by proof. This logic was employed by Tarski in his development of the model theory.

Truth in Philosophy

Philosophy determines truth to be the closest, accurate definition of "things" or the extent to which its representation holds true.[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth The most common mode of determining truth in philosophy is through dialectics - method of philosophical argument involving a contradictory process with opposing sides. Plato determined truth through a linear progression of philosophical argument. He presented this as a back and forth dialogue between two opposing sides: a character usually depicted as Socrates and his interlocutors. In the course of this debate, Socrates would challenge the definitions proposed by his interlocutors on various concepts or views. Socrates' challenges and oppositions would act as a catalyst for his interlocutors to refine their views, achieving more sophisticated definitions as a result of this back and forth debate.

This mode of reasoning has been largely accepted as a process for evolution in philosophical views on truth. However, Hegel's concept of dialectics challenges this mode of reasoning. In the Phenomenology of Spirit, Hegel adopts Plato's dialectics but instead presents his "opposing sides" as different definitions of consciousness and the object the consciousness claims to know. He argues that this form of argument is an elevated procedure of reasoning that transcends Plato's dialectics. Hegel’s account of reasoning thus not only characterizes logic but “everything true in general”. As Plato's dialectics imply that once an argument reaches a contradiction it must be discarded altogether till a new argument is postulated, as accorded by reductio ad absurdum. Hegel begins with uncontroversial facts and through dialectics shows that domains have to be imposed on a definition for it to hold true. His brand of logic aims to discover "in opposites the respect in which they are alike" so a definition can be retained through justifying the extent and degree in which it is true. This method of reasoning causes 'self-sublation' in which the initial definition is simultaneously negated and preserved. The contradiction is thus resolved to form a more refined, universal definition that holds true.

Hegel's paradox can be elucidated through his lord-bondsman dialectic. In this dialectic, two self-conscious beings fight for power. The winner is the lord, he receives recognition accordingly. The other is the bondsman, he is enslaved to give recognition. The lord is free yet he is ultimately dependent on the bondsman for self-definition. He is nothing without his antithesis. Two abstract beings are sublated till they are unified. The truth of one's self is Hegel argues that contradictions are inherent in truth and we need to rely on a process of reasoning that allows for divisive truth which is able to transcend definitions rather than negate them.

Truth in the philosophy of art

In Greek, art is 'techne', suggesting that there is no art without technique. An artist is someone who works hard to master many techniques, and creates an original creation which produces an aesthetic feeling.

Plato, book 10 of the Republic.

Artists are not creators but imitators. The work of art tries to copy reality. The imitation is bad, because it does not serve any purpose, and because it copies an example (a particular case) of an idea. As an example, Van Gogh painted a green chair in 1888. To Plato, this chair is useless (it's a painting, one cannot really sit on it), it imitates an example of a chair (Van Gogh's real chair, the one he took as a model to paint), which itself imitates the idea of a chair (the 'concept' of a chair, which is the ideal for Plato). Indeed, the goal of philosophy for Plato would be to reach the world of Ideas (theory of forms), which includes the three ideals: the Good, the True and The Beautiful.

To Plato, only concepts, or ideas, are true. Our sensitive reality is an imitation of the truth, and since art is an imitation of our sensitive reality, it is therefore a doubly false imitation. Truth can only be reached by abstraction, in other words, by exercising our minds to philosophy.

Aristotle, Poetics, the catharsis theory:

When going to the theatre, Greeks expressed all their urges (often negative) by transfer, by procuration. A good artist (actor, playwright) makes the public forget that what they are living is false so that they can reduce their urges and emotions. A good artist is therefore a good imitator, and art does serve a purpose, the catharsis. Here, a good artist is a good liar (he is the one who can fake the truth), so this conception is quite opposed to Plato's.