User:JREverest/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge/Seminar group 6/Truth

Truth

Truth is broadly defined as a fact or belief which is accepted to be true and therefore in accordance with fact or reality. As such, the concept of truth has different applications in different contexts and may even lead to two opposing views both being seen as 'truth' within the same context.

Truth is by definition definitive but may be perceived differently by different individuals. One person's interpretation of "truth" may not be the same as another person's. It is interesting to note, that when employed, this word comes across as a certainty, an absolute truth.

Truth can be defined as the match between a judgment and the real. For example, a tree is real and a judgment on the tree can be true or false. The truth is therefore a true judgment. The truth is difficult to discover, the tool that we must use is the demonstration. Depending on different disciplines, we do not necessarily demonstrate the same way. In natural sciences, for example, it is the experience that demonstrates the truth. In "pure" sciences, we speak of mathematical demonstration, it is presented as a system of which all the propositions are demonstrated and coherent with each other.However, it is very difficult to demonstrate the truth in social sciences (philosophy, sociology, economics) because the social sciences generally study human behaviour and and the social relationships within societies.Yet even in the social sciences,for example economics, there are such things as "normative" and "positive" statements. Normative economics statements are opinion based and thus do not show objective truth whereas positive economic statements must be tested and thus can be proved or disproved to show truth. In fact, it is very difficult to show a certain coherence in these behaviors and make generalities out of it.

Gottlob Frege and 'truth'

Truth values

Gottlob Frege was a philosopher and logician who was concerned with, among other things, the interface of language and mathematics. He is well-known for establishing the term 'truth values'. This is the notion that all propositions will have an absolute truth value: 1 for true and 0 for false. All English sentences can be translated into proper syntax of proposition logic, and from that a truth value for the proposition can be derived. If it is not clear in English whether a statement is definitively true or false, a logician would argue that it simply has not been defined clearly enough, and is dependent on unspecified variables. Perhaps the context of a statement is significant in determining whether or not it is true, but once the context has been specified, the statement should have an absolute truth, i.e. be definitively either true or false. This view does not leave room for subjectivity or relativity in the notion of truth.

Relativism

Relativism in truth may become relevant if it is not possible to define all the conditions of a statement. For example, whether the statement "tomorrow is Wednesday" is true or not, depends on what day it is today. The day that the statement is made determines whether the statement is true or false. In a lot of cases, it may not be possible to specify all conditions of a statement, and this is were relativism is introduced in truth. Something may be true in one context but not in the other, and unless we can identify these factors (such as context) and their impact on the truth values of a statement, we get the impression that truth will always be subjective, and we can never arrive at an absolute truth. But with a Fregean approach to truth, as long as all parameters of a statement have defined values, the statement will have an absolute truth value.

Types of truths

Analytic truth (logical truths)

Immanuel Kant described these as statements that are true simply through the meanings of the constituent terms used. This means that the reader’s ability to understand the sentence and its meaning is the only factor taken into account when categorising the phrase as true. By analysing the meanings of words in a sentence, the individual is capable of discerning it to be true or not. For example with the statement: “all apples are fruit”, the individual, knowing the definitions of apples and fruit, is capable of self-recognising the statement as true and accurate. These types of statements can be regarded as redundant as one of the terms is already encompassed within the other, in terms of its definition.

Synthetic truths

Kant describes these as statements that can only be seen as truth to be true based on our own experiences and observations. Unlike with analytic truths, the individual’s knowledge of the definition of individual words within the sentence does not automatically mean they can identify the statement as true. Here, the description is not already defined by the subject of the sentence. For example, “leaves are green” cannot automatically be characterised as true, but neither can it be deemed false. If an individual does categorise it as a truth, then it is a synthetic truth, as it was formed on a basis of our observations. However, as here there is no logical method of finding the truth, it could actually be false.

Truth in different disciplines

Truth in Religion

Many religions claim to have insight into truth. For instance, in the Bible, the word 'truth' is used 235 times. Jesus went further in claiming to actually be the truth and is quoted in John 14 verse 6 , to be "the way, the truth and the life". In this way, the Christian interpretation of truth is the word of God: the things He says are truthful, for he is omniscient and omnipotent. A Christian, therefore, will aspire to live a truthful life, by living in accordance with the words of scripture.

In Diamond Sutra, it states that things in this world are unreal and inconstant. Therefore, people have to not “persist" to the theorems from two sides, but should go beyond the innate cognitions in order to find "truth". It believes that all people have the ability to see the truth of this world, but are just blinded by "rupa".

Truth in Science

Within science the notion of truth is generally considered to be the best theory of evidential data. There are particular problems faced in this field as there is often fluctuation as what we once believed to be true may now be proved false. This leads us to resolve whether we can still consider these propositions as truth, which we would have perceived them to be, or if the new evidence means that it was always false.

The Standard theory of truth

This theory is dependent on how the world is and thus how we perceive it. If a proposition turns out to be false it must always have been false otherwise we face inconsistency. The issue here is that one may ask whether propositions may ever reach truth and if it is unreachable why should we be inclined to act as though they are true. If we look back into history we can recognise the extent to which our knowledge is constantly modified and if this is to continue what we believe to be true now may end up being false. What we deem to be true in science coincides with large investments of time, resources and money as well as our own lives as it essentially dictates our survival and how we development.

The Contextual theory of truth

The coherence theory entails that truth is observer dependant and that we can state the truth if it coheres with the current available evidence. This enables us to still see truth at particular times they are believed to be and recognize shifts induced by new evidence without having to discard prior beliefs as false. This is the idea of context dependence, as the truth is expressed within the parameters of what is believed to be the case in that context. The Best theory theory is another contextual theory where the proposition is deemed true given it is the best theory of evidence available at that point. Furthermore, this theory allows for variance depending on context and provides objective criteria in defining truth.

Truth in Economics

In economics, there are two types of truths: normative vs. positive truths.

Normative economics are based on human values, opinions and judgement. Their nature is prescriptive: they pass value on judgement, it's from a subjective point of view. It is the study of what should be, but its statements cannot be tested. It provides solutions for economic issues based on value.

Positive economics are based on facts and data. The nature of this branch of economics is descriptive, it simply analyses cause and effect relationships between events, so it is from an objective perspective. It is the study of reality, of what actually is, so its statements can be tested using scientific methods. It describes an economic issue.

Truth in Anthropology

As a discipline, anthropology's approach to truth has changed over time. Originally, anthropologists believed they were able to form truths about society in general and individual societies and cultures from their research and fieldwork. This was in fitting with the theory of 'evolutionary' anthropology, where it was believed, largely without challenge, that societies developed on the same 'evolutionary' basis, with cultural and societal differences being attributed to different places being at different stages of this evolutionary process. This belief was so widely accepted as truth that it:

• formed the basis of colonial intervention in order to speed up the 'evolutionary process' for these societies and cultures which were considered 'primitive'.
• shaped social reform from above such as improving the conditions of the poor in order to also speed up the evolutionary process of progress of these 'primitive' and 'savage' people.

As the development of human nature and society was seen to be explained by evolution and science, anthropologists felt they were able to make conclusions about societies and cultures that were entirely truthful. This was also supported by their use of experimental methods which fell more in line with the traditional 'hard science' objective view of evidence to support truth than the more subjective forms of truth and evidence typically seen within the social sciences.

Over time this was replaced with ethnological anthropology which was not evolutionary and placed a much greater focus upon ethnography as a subjective type of evidence to support truth which entailed the detailed and extensive study of individual societies and cultures rather than the formation of 'truth' about these societies and cultures based purely on the accepted truth of evolutionary anthropological theory. This was accompanied by a widespread acceptance among anthropologists that any 'truth' is created by humans and thus limited to the constraints of humanity and open to redefinition over time. As such, 'truth' in anthropology is still seen as difficult to define ; even anthropological statements about a society are representative truths, with 'truth' being an act of reflecting a society's native's representations of their own culture and society in the terms of the anthropologist. Anthropology therefore may not utilize the idea of 'objective' truth, instead using truth in its 'subjective' form while also criticizing that there may even be a single, lasting 'truth' at all

Truth in Law

Truth in Law is a complex topic: what the court decides happens, whether right or wrong, becomes the truth. Throughout history, there have been examples of cases that have been brought into the public eye and had enormous consequences due to issues relating to truth. To illustrate, when President Bill Clinton was caught lying under oath, Clinton's horrific decision to lie on a very public platform in a court of law led to a trial of impeachment. Due to lying on the stand about his affair with Monica Lewinsky, Clinton found himself on the edge of political ruin, becoming only the second president in US history to be impeached. Clinton's dishonesty and failure to tell the truth on the stand cost Al Gore (fellow Democrat) the faith of voters, meaning a loss in the 2000 Presidential Election. The President Clinton case has been speculated by academics/experts in a variety of disciplines, but all come to the same conclusion: his fatal error to tell the truth resulted in turmoil and backlash from both those in the legal profession, and the general public.

Similarly, truth in law has also been a public issue with regards to miscarriages of justice. A miscarriage of justice occurs when a person is convicted falsely; the truth has not been found. Famously, British newspapers such as The Sun and The Mirror were prejudiced in 2011 when reporting the case of Christopher Jefferies. In December 2010, Jefferies was briefly arrested by Bristol police under suspicion over the murder of his tenant, landscape architect Joanna Yeates. Newspapers quickly rushed to their own verdict and vilified him, describing him as "a peeping tom" and "creepy". Painting him in a sinister light, headlines blew up in the week before Christmas 2010, and they would have been incredibly difficult to disregard as untrue; with over eight powerful broadsheets offering up horrific nicknames and stories (such as The Sun's headline "Evidence... maps were on the back seat", accompanied by an image of a Bristol A-Z in Jefferies' car), the news vilified Jefferies on a life-wrecking scale. Speaking of the coverage, Jefferies described the experience to the Financial Times: "My identity had been violated. My privacy had been intruded upon. My whole life... I don't think it would be too strong a word to say that it was a kind of rape that had taken place."By completing twisting the truth, British newspapers managed to ruin a person's career, and, given the importance of truth in our society as well as in law, Jefferies sued, and receiving libel damages from eight papers. Interestingly, newspapers now refrain from using accusatory language, opting for words such as "alleged" until a decision has been made in a court of law.

Sworn testimony

Across the globe, sworn testimony is a fundamental element of a trial. Sworn testimony is evidence given by a witness, that they have promised is truthful. If it is discovered that the witness lied on the stand, there are huge repercussions: referred to as "perjuring" yourself, witnesses are charged with the crime of perjury for lying under oath.

When taking the witness stand, witnesses must make different statements, that vary from country to country, but all centre on the promise of the truth.

Examples of oaths and affirmations across the world:

England: I do solemnly and sincerely and truly declare and affirm that the evidence I shall give shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Canada: I solemnly affirm that the evidence to be given by me shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

South Africa: I swear that the evidence that I shall give, shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God.

Truth in Politics

In political systems, the belief that politicians lie and are not truthful is ubiquitous amongst voters, with the majority of world leaders being placed at the bottom of indices of trust. 2016 was a testing year for western politics, with both the UK's EU Referendum and Trump's historic win in the US Election causing huge controversies and doubts about truthfulness in campaigns. Dubbed "fake news" by Trump, the idea that politicians and the media give information to voters that is untrue and thus causing them to come to incorrect conclusions is problematic. Interestingly, the political restlessness and tension that has arisen in the two years since both elections has been coined as an era of "Post-truth Politics". This phrase refers to a world in which the truth is less important than public attitudes, where everybody makes their own opinion and thus has their own "facts".

Despite the rise in Post-Truth Politics over the past couple of years, the concept is not that new: over fifty years ago in a The New Yorker article, similar ideas were discussed: it was speculated that "Even in Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Russia, it was more dangerous to talk about concentration and extermination camps, whose existence was no secret, than to hold and to utter "heretical" views on anti-Semitism, racism, and Communism". This demonstrates the warped nature of truth in politics, and the amount it is suppressed, ignored, and manipulated globally.

Truth in Art

One of the things that has been said to be the purpose of art is its cognitive function: art as a means to the acquisition of truth.

If art cannot be a way to truth then the only thing considered in art is taste. The contradiction is that one has to accept the truth even if they do not like it. In this case art has no power: it becomes design.

Art can evoke the same emotions, thoughts, moral and ethical controversies, and conflicts that we experience in our lives. If we judge a work to be realistic, it means that we have already encountered something similar to it in life. But sometimes art appears to be able to portray situations that we have not encountered, yet it is done in a way so we know that the unfolding of events was plausible or shows us what it would have been like to experience the situation. It can also inspire us to change our lifestyle, it tells us how we should/could be living our lives.

Truth in art doesn't have to only focus accurately representing reality. When the artist uses representation, he uses it to give us a sense of reality, not to replicate what we perceive. Even if the value of art does not solely depend on representing reality accurately, it sometimes must include the matter of reality if it conveying a message.

Truth in Philosophy

Truth is a concept that all philosophers have to face when they consider problems about meaning of life and existence. Many philosophers believe that they stand for the truth, however their viewpoints could be totally different or even diametrically opposed.

The first person who made a philosophical thinking of truth was Aristotle. He said in Metaphysica that, “To say of what is that it is not, or for what is not that it is, is false, while to say of what is that it is, and of what is not that it is not, is true.”

Coherence Theory of Truth:

There are two versions of Coherence Theory of Truth. One is that the coherence relation is just consistency. On this view, to say that a proposition coheres with a specified set of propositions is to say that the proposition is consistent with the set. Another more plausible version is that the coherence relation is some form of entailment. Put the rule simply: a belief is true if we are able to incorporate it in an orderly and logical manner into a larger and complex system of beliefs.

Correspondence Theory of Truth:

The correspondence theory of truth states that truth is correspondence to a fact and this view was proposed by Russell and Moore early in the 20th century. But the label is usually applied much more broadly to any view explicitly embracing the idea that truth consists in a relation to reality. This theory, in nature, is trying to build a relationship between thought, or statement and objects.

The Neo-Classical Correspondence Theory of Truth:

Whilst with the correspondence theory of truth a belief is true if there exists a fact that to which it corresponds, with the neo-classical correspondence theory facts are entities in their own right. Facts are generally considered to be composed of particulars and properties or universals. Therefore, the neo-classical correspondence theory only makes sense within the setting of a meta-physics that includes such facts.

Truth in Psychiatry

Psychiatry is surrounded by many speculations involving truth, in diagnosis of mental disorders as well as the causes and treatments. There is little evidence to show where mental disorders derive from, but many people believe it is due to a 'chemical imbalance in the brain' and physical or emotional trauma, although these are just opinions.

As well as there being little known about the causes of psychiatric disorders, leading into the mid twentieth century there was some speculation about whether those who were put into mental institutes were actually mentally ill or not, and what qualified as a mental illness. For example in Victorian times women may be considered to have 'disorders' such as 'menstruation-related anger', 'disobedience' or 'chronic fatigue syndrome' which could all result in her being placed in an institution. The truth about the poor conditions in mental institutes was also covered up from the public until people began to investigate this issue.

Issues with truth

Truth can be seen as subjective; what may be true for one person, may not be for another. This can lead to conflict as for example with the Brexit vote. Many people are convinced that Britain will be better off outside the EU while others perceive that it is better to remain within the EU.

Truth can be seen as a changing concept which is influenced by multiple facets (such as, but not limited to; values, morals, context, education…). For instance, homosexuality was perceived as a deviant behaviour until very recently.

Positive vs Normative Truth

Positive truth is independent of human values whereas normative truth is associated with human values, one being objective and fact based whilst the other is subjective and based primarily on human opinion. Different fields of study incorporate these different types of truths into their work and the evidence they produce. For example a piece of scientific evidence would comply with a positive truth as it has been backed up and proven via research.

Subjective vs. Objective Truth

Objectivity:

This includes the scientific analysis to identify an object, measure, quantify or qualify for various parameters and confirm the result, which is a reality to the given circumstances. It is solely based on facts. Objective information is meant to be completely unbiased and can be described without any ambiguity. The method is adapted in testing and analyzing and accepted by all.

But, even this objectivity can change with different circumstances. Objective truth should be considered as the "absolute truth" but that is unreachable. It is merely a reality for a particular situation.

Subjectivity:

It falls under one’s personal impressions, feelings, views or opinions, and not external facts. It cannot be subjected to scientific analysis or observation and there is no way to confirm or refer it to any established norms, in which case controversy is bound to exist. The truth one believes is dependent on one’s knowledge, understanding and experience. It is contextual: a suspicion, a belief, a rumor.

Whether it is objective or subjective, absolute truth is beyond the reach of humanity and whatever we say is true is based on particular circumstances, a place, a time, that makes that reality true in that moment.

False Truth

Due to the nature of truth as being what is 'accepted to be true' , there is the possibility for false information to be accepted as truth. This may be the result of conscious efforts by certain individuals by or the human unconscious.

Illusory truth effect

The illusory truth effect is a phenomenon where humans tend to believe information is true simply because they have been regularly exposed to a belief or statement and therefore recognize it as familiar. This effect has impacts in many areas such as propaganda, political campaigns, advertising and 'fake news'. Some famous examples of this effect include the belief that Australia's capital is Sydney and the case of comedian Sam Hyde being blamed for the London Bridge attack in 2017.

Loftus and Palmer (1974) Study: Eyewitness Testimony

In their 1974 cognitive psychological study, Loftus and Palmer evaluated the responses of eyewitnesses when shown a video of a car accident. Before the study, eyewitness testimony was taken at face value in a court of law: it relied upon the memories of the witnesses, who were believed to be truthful in their accounts (under oath). Loftus and Palmer, however, were dubious about the accuracy of recall: they suggested that the reliability of eyewitness testimony should be questioned. In this way, they offered that despite unknowingly doing so, eyewitnesses may be giving false recounts. Not dissimilar from the illusory truth effect, their reasoning was based on Barlett's schema theory, which suggests that as human beings, we categorise information and remember it based on different schemas; we place it where it logically fits. For example, if we see a blue bird flying, we would automatically categorise it as a bluebird or perhaps a blue tit, as these are the most logical descriptions, despite us not being sure whether that is actually what we saw.

In the study, Loftus and Palmer evaluated responses by asking students at The University of Washington a set of questions following a video being shown to them of a car accident. They asked the group questions, with the verb used in the question being altered (independent variable). There were three conditions in the sentence "How fast were the cars going when they ‘verb’ each other?”

1) Hit

2) Smashed

3) Control group were not given verbs relating to speed/force

Interestingly, Loftus and Palmer found that overwhelmingly, students who were given leading questions with the verbs "hit" and "smashed" reported the cars as moving significantly more quickly than the students in the control group. This study demonstrates the power of language and memory; the students did not mean to be untruthful in their accounts, but were remembering poorly. This calls the power and reliability of eyewitness testimony into question.

Intentional presentation of false truths

It may also be the case that certain people or groups of people set out with the intentions of presenting a false truth. A major example of this is the 'Grievance Studies Hoax' where a group of academics were able to write false academic papers and have seven of these 21 written papers accepted for publication, thus being presented as 'truth'. The group claimed they did so in order to expose how easy it was for false information to become accepted as truth within a discipline.