User:Nicola.georgiou/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge/Seminar group 13/ Truth

From Wikibooks, open books for an open world
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Seminar Group 13 Truth Contributions

Introduction[edit | edit source]

"All men by nature desire to know."[1]. In making this claim, Aristotle states that people do not simply wish to know anything, they wish to know the truth of what surrounds them. Many individuals may have distinct understandings of what faithfully reflects the truth, does this mean truth is subjective, or does there exist a single objective truth? How then, do human beings come to find that singular truth? By looking at truth in different disciplines, it is made apparent that our understanding of truth is permanently evolving, that different factors have an influence on how truth is socially understood.

We find truth in many different forms, ranging from a more objective and evidence-based approach, where truth is seen as globally accepted facts. Then we also find truth in the from of a more subjective and abstract philosophical thought based on abstract theories. Thus we see how truth forms a spectrum and can be categorised in multiple different ways. Specific categorisations include:

  • Positivist truth: This classification places truth as a measurable and quantifiable fact that is objective and that can be proven through empirical data[2]. Traditionally tied to the sciences.
  • Interpretive truth: This classification is based on human experience and is based on the consciousness and perspective of individuals, form a more subjective interpretation of truth. Traditionally tied to the humanities and arts.
  • Constructivist truth: This classification argues that truth is a human and social construction, meaning that we can reach truth through a community of knowers[3]. Traditionally tied to the social sciences.

Censorship[edit | edit source]

Queer Erasure[edit | edit source]

Queer erasure is a heteronormative tendency which, whether purposefully or merely through a process of cultural drift, seeks to diminish the presence of non-heterosexual and cis individuals, removing their identity from them or simply removing them from the historical record. [4] This concept continues to gain traction in modern day academic discussion, having stemmed from queer theory “queer theory is a call to transgress conventional understandings of gender and sexuality and to disrupt the boundary that separates heterosexuality from homosexuality." [5] and was first utilised by experts such as Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, Diana Fuss, and Judith Butler for example.

Erasure as law in the modern day[edit | edit source]

Modern history includes various examples of the use of censorship and legal coercion to promote an anti-queer ideology, and thus control a portion of a society's truth. One example of these processes is known in British politics as section 28, which stated that an authority “shall not intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality” or “promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship.” [6]. This enactment which at the time forced the closer of student and staff ran support groups across Britain out of fear of legal reprisals [7], would go on to deprive a generation of queer youth from an education both regarding their history but also as regards sex education. However most importantly thruth regarding the wide spectrum of sexuality and the reality of the existence of homosexuals was erased from this entire generation, in a way deceiving them into believing another more archaic truth with underlying homophobic notions. Section 28 was passed as part of the Local Government Act of 1988, a date which is particularly relevant because of the first reports of HIV/Aids appearing during the 1980’s [8] a fact that has been highlighted as a possible motive for the sudden stigmatisation of queer groups and which makes the sudden lack of formal sex education among the youth a policy that placed the lives of the youth at risk. This example also comes to show how ones perception of truth is social and supports the idea of a constructivist truth.

Erasure as representation[edit | edit source]

Representation in media refers to the use of or presence of certain groups, collectives or ideologies within the media consumed by the general public [9]. In this context it refers to the absence or at time removal of queer figures from the mainstream. The most prominent method by which this is achieved is referred to colloquially as ‘straight-washing’ “Straightwashing is the assimilation of someone who is gay, lesbian, bisexual asexual or other to fit heterosexual cultural norms. Put simply, it’s the practice of portraying non-straight people or characters as straight.” [10]. A concept akin to that of “whitewashing”. This idea of "straightwashing" really comes to show how the concepts of truth is much more flexible and fluid than the objective and rigid idea we have in our minds as we see how truth can be modifed by external sources and that truth's that we sometimes accept as ultimate and universal is actually a subjective construction. Thus we need to start questioning truth and really be observant with the origins of many different truths that surround us on the daily.

Correspondence Theory of Truth[edit | edit source]

Correspondence theory is one of the most famous visions of truth as a philosophical and metaphysical concept. It states that a statement can only be proven true or false depending on how it relates to the world. In other words, truth corresponds to reality.[11] This perspective being so vast, it allowed a string of different sub-theories to emerge under it throughout time. These other strands of the theory can exist thanks to the vast terminologies and terms concerning truth in general, leading to a multiplicity of versions and reformulations of the theory. Correspondent theorist analyse the relation between between what is and what they want to determine is true or not. However, the different types of relations are quite numerous (eg. coherence, congruence, accordance, copying, …) and so are the relevant portions of what exists (eg. facts, states of affairs, conditions, situations, events…)[12][13].

History[edit | edit source]

The roots of correspondence theory dates back to Ancient Greek philosophy, especially with thinkers such as Plato or Aristotle. Aristotle’s definition of truth evidences is an early example of correspondence theory: « To say that that which is, is not, and that which is not, is, is a falsehood; therefore, to say that which is, is, and that which is not, is not, is true ».[14][15] However, these first definitions of correspondence theory were very vague and offered little clarifications on the concept of truth. Aristotle and Plato are more clear in their respective works, Categories and Cratylus. Nonetheless, greek philosophers weren’t the only one to be interested in correspondence theory. On the contrary, this theory continued to evolve throughout time. Thinkers such as Thomas Aquinas[16], Descartes, Hume, Leibniz, Kant, Locke or even Karl Marx have at some point defined, interpreted or defended the correspondence theory of truth.[17]

Correspondence theory holds the majority when it comes to the other perspectives of truth (namely deflationary or epistemic).[18] This is mostly due to the fact that this theory is one whose direct obviousness makes easier to understand. However, correspondence theory of truth faces criticism as well. Some perceive correspondence theory as too narrow, as in only applicable to sciences and not to morality or logic as no objective facts exist in these domains. They are also seen by some as too obvious and trivial, as the process of correspondence theorists’ thinking is one that can appear very simplistic and evident from afar.[19]

Language and Truth[edit | edit source]

Language began as a tool for human beings to communicate with each other.[20] In this regard, the epistemology of language can be said to be social constructivism[21]. As social beings, humans designed language in order to fulfil their need for communication[22] and its use and complexities wax or wane depending on the communicative needs of social groups[20].The field of linguistic studies analyses language and its influences on human beings[23]. Linguistic determinism is one of its theories that explores the way in which language affects human behaviour. It argues that language can restrict our world view specifically through categorisation, memory, perception, and how we think[24]. An example of this is colour discrimination between Russian and English speakers. In Russian there is no umbrella term for all shades of blue like in English, instead they have separate words for lighter blues (“goluboy”) and darker blues (“siniy”). Research has demonstrated that Russian speakers were able to discriminate between light blue and dark blue more easily than English speakers as a result of these linguistic differences thus demonstrating how different social groups have different social truths[25].

The philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche supported the theory of linguistic determinism claiming that there is no universal “truth”. Language does not shape our worldview, rather language is our world view because our understanding and knowledge is confined by our language. Therefore, as written by Le Quyen Pham, “there is no single ‘true’ truth, but only an illusion of one, and a multiplicity of truths presented in languages.”[26] Following this argument it can be said that language creates a unique subjective truth for each individual seeing as all human beings have varying linguistic capabilities ranging from the size of their vocabulary to the number of languages they can speak.

Logical Truth[edit | edit source]

Truth in logic, and as it is viewed by some in mathematics, can be seen to differ from truth in other disciplines because statements in a formal, logical language can be deemed true or false regardless of semantics, as posed by Frege in his Basic Laws of Arithmetic [27]. Carnap defended this thesis in Logical Syntax of Language, arguing that Mathematics and logic are analytic hence without semantic content. [28] Thus, given a logical truth, being analytic, it is true under all possible interpretations of its logical components, as opposed to facts or synthetic truths whose truth is based on the world as represented around us. [29]. However, this idea that truth within logic depends on its analytic nature has been challenged: Quine questioned ‘how claiming logical truth to be analytic differs from merely claiming them to be obviously and universally correct’ [30] i.e. whether there is actually any epistemological substance to these truths at all. Gödel used his Incompleteness theorems to formulate an argument in opposition to Carnap’s philosophy of mathematics, namely that of logical positivism, since they can be applied to demonstrate that the modelling of basic arithmetic using a formal logical system is non-analytic. [31] Taken further, Gödel’s Incompleteness theorems have been applied to show the existence of synthetic truths in number theory, causing a shift in the discipline’s approach to truth: appreciating that mathematical knowledge is corrigible which, in turn, condones the need for empirical, or at least -quasi empirical, methods. [32]

Truth in the Arts[edit | edit source]

Truth in Photography[edit | edit source]

Photography as a discipline does produce physical objects that adhere to the idea of subjective truth being a truth-based off a person's perspective, feelings, or opinions. Everything we know is based on our input - our senses, our perception[33]. However, a photograph as an accurate and realistic depiction of reality causes us to look at photographs and derive some notion of truth about the world from what we see in the picture[34]. Thus the question arises, is there objective truth within photography?

When we speak about a photographer, we need to realize that compared to a painter, the reality they are capturing is not artificial, but is in some way or form capturing the truth of the reality we exist in. The problem is that pieces of fine art are artefacts, and in some cases photographs are too, as they are the artistic construction of the photographer. However, a photograph to the external viewer will most of the time look like the objective truthful depiction of what was in front of and captured by the camera lens.

We thus need to create a distinction, between what we consider as truth for the world, what we as humans can universally see and experience which is captured by the camera, of what is truth for the photographer, what the photographer wants us to see. This requires a repositions of the question of photography, as we move from a concern with the truth content of the photographic image to one delimited by the existence of the photographic image.[35]With this new distinction, we can look at photograph as not objective measures of reality but also as a clearly biased and manipulated version of truth. Be it the truth of time or the truth of memory photography is deemed to stand in stark opposition to another and more insistent sense of the real[36]. It is as though photography is condemned to efface the truth.

Therefore, we can see how through the discipline of photography we find the clear paradox that the idea of truth presents. We can observe it as continuously fluctuating and changing, ultimately being somewhat of a spectrum where on one hand we have the objective truth based empirical evidence and on the other the subjective ideas and perspectives that come from individual perspectives and ideas. Nonetheless, as opposed to other disciplines in photography there is no such distinction, as the very objective evidence of the photograph itself is always influenced by subjective biases of the photographer. Put in other words photography takes from the world but it is not the world.[37]

Thus, now the issue is not that there is no such thing as a objective photograph, but the idea that photographs can tell us about both our truth and the photographers truth. Quite special in the field of photography is the fact that it allows for a analysis of unconscious biases and truths that we take for granted as photographers don’t show us the truth, but a truth.[38] Sometimes photographs can be sometimes it is a mode of storytelling that incorporates ideas of truth, reality, cultural value systems, and perception.[39] With digital manipulation, for instance, photographs can be seamlessly altered to reflect whatever the photographers or editors wish to show. When the O.J. Simpson murder case was the biggest news story of the day, the picture of Simpson on Time’s cover had noticeably darker skin than the same mug shot picture featured on Newsweek or on other prominent news magazines.[40] Another example can be found in photography of people in the Dust Bowl and the Great Depression in the United States we think of the iconic picture of Dorothea Lange titles “Mother and baby of family on the road” in Tulelake, Siskiyou County, California. 1939. The photograph seems to show a homeless mother and child who only have they car and clothes, living in the desperate reality of the worst economic catastrophe of the twentieth century. But in the same collection of pictures we see many other photos Dorothea Lange took of this mother and child with the child’s face freshly cleaned and them both laughing together. This second image almost feels false and untruthful.

Truth in the Humanities[edit | edit source]

Truth in History[edit | edit source]

The study of history is more than a collection of names, dates and statistics. It is the analysis of the paradigms that shape significant events, as well as the consideration of who has had a voice to speak their truth throughout history, generally speaking: successful, white men.

Uncovering historical truth is dependent on obtaining and analysing primary sources, relating to the fields of archaeology, literature and anthropology. But evidence can be contradictory, and humans struggle to fully eradicate bias and prejudice. [41] The use of secondary sources means that errors in such sources are repeated and possibly amplified, distorting truth. Secondary sources can contain biases, mistakes, or can emit relevant information, hence truth in history relies on primary sources. Dates and facts can be checked and confirmed, but any event is more than just a date, yet all the motivations and consequences are so complex that it is impossible to truly glean a single truth. [42] Hence caution is exercised when making historical assertions.

Objectivity is both unattainable and vital in historical truth. Whilst it can be acknowledged that is nearly impossible for humans to be completely objective, it is state that historians work towards. The factors that shape historically significant events; emotions, motivations and ambitions of individuals can only be estimated. Truth in history is seen sometimes to be constructed - evidence can framed in such a way that suits the agenda of the historian.

Truth in Literature[edit | edit source]

Literature is composed of “written artistic works, especially those with a high and lasting artistic value” [43]. As they are described as artistic, literature pieces should be entertaining for readers and arouse their interest. This raises the question of truth in literature : could people obtain what they are looking for with perfectly truthful novels that relate to their experiences or do they need readings that are completely distinct from what they live or could live ? The best way to describe literature’s purpose is probably by understanding the writers’ very own approaches.

Different approaches to truth within written artistic works[edit | edit source]

On the one hand, truth and accuracy have often been considered the right approach to literature. Indeed, Aristotle claimed the most important feature of it should be to describe reality in the most plausible way. According to him, “events which are impossible but plausible should be preferred to those which are possible but implausible”[44]. This conception was the very basis of a whole literary movement of the 19th century,Realism. The French novelist Guy de Maupassant describes it claiming that talented realistic writers would better be called “Illusionists” as their goal should be to create the impression of reality even when describing facts and events that are untrue. [45]. Stendhal, another novelist from this wave, had an even more straightforward approach. He stated “a novel is a mirror carried along a high road”[46] meaning that it should reflect the exact reality as good or as hard as it can be. These two approaches show how important it may be to present truth and real things in literature.

On the other hand, it cannot be denied that a consistent part of literature works is all about fiction. Plato indeed stated that “a poetic imitator uses words and phrases to paint coloured pictures of each of the crafts”[47] : writers write to impress readers, not to offer them a description of their reality. This is what Jules Verne did with Twenty Thousand Leagues under the Sea published in 1869, taking part in the science-fiction genre and describing a fictional concept that Plato had elaborated, the Atlantis. Until the end of the 20th century, Jules Verne was the most traduced novelist in the world, proving how successful fictional literature is and that it may be what readers are looking for.[48] In addition, there is another way in which fiction might be the right approach in literature. Charles Perrault and the Grimm brothers, respectively in the 17th and 19th centuries, aimed at making children aware of how dangerous trusting strangers was with Little Red Riding Hood. In this way, fiction in literature can serve an educational purpose and might be more efficient than pure truth.

To conclude, opinions have always differed about the place truth should have in literature and it appears authors can reach their goals with or without it. Nevertheless, it is to be noted that the most sold books today are part of the fantasy genre, with, for instance, the Harry Potter saga by J.K. Rowling. This gives proof of a tendency towards fiction more than truth in literature and possibly reflects a need to forget about reality through reading, especially in such hard times as today’s.

Truth in Theology - Buddhism[edit | edit source]

Two Truths Doctrine[edit | edit source]

Dvisatya, or the Doctrine of Two Truths, refers to the differentiation, in Buddhist discourse, of two levels of truth (Sanskrit: satya) - saṁvṛiti-satya, defined in the Dharma-saṃgraha as the conventional truth, and paramārtha-satya, an ultimate truth. [49] This duality expounds the Buddhist theological interpretation of the notions of empirical and absolute truths.

The saṁvṛiti-satya, roughly translated as the conventional, relative or empirical truth, represents the common reality of ordinary people’s lived experiences. [50] It is an epistemological term representing an everyday comprehension of the world as constructed by the mind and projected onto a greater ultimate reality. [51] However, this conception is dualistic as it is prone to misperception.

In contrast to relative truth, paramārtha-satya is nondualist, representing an absolute reality, which may be considered as experience without conceptionalisation. [52]This reality is devoid of inherent characteristics or objects, and is linked to the Buddhist notion of Śūnyatā – emptiness, or an interdependent existence. [53]

Madhyamaka school[edit | edit source]

One of the most influential and complete articulations of the two truth doctrine was expounded within the Madhyamaka school of Buddhism.[54] The founder of the Madhyamaka school, Nāgārjuna, first expressed the two truth schema in its modern form in his work Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, or Fundamental Verses in the Middle Way. [55]

In articulating the two conceptions of truth, Nāgārjuna suggested that while relative truth may only be designated verbally, ultimate truth is purely intuitive.[53] His conclusion however, suggests that verbal designations do not correspond to states of substantial independence, and thus a realist school of thought asserting this existence should be considered untrue. [56] This conception of truth fundamentally underpins the Buddhist notion of Śūnyavāda, or emptiness. The verbal designation of emptiness is a relative conception which thus suggests that it is in itself empty. Thereby, the theory of emptiness may be considered itself a conceptualisation, so to reach a comprehension of the nature of things, all concepts must be abandoned.[57]

Truth in the Media[edit | edit source]

The media is all the means of communication such as television, newspapers, the internet and the radio that reach large numbers of people. [58]It is the source of all our information and is supposed to provide us with quality information. Medias are pillar of democracy as they are a way for people to gain awareness, form an opinion of their own and be able to express themselves.[59]It is supposed to be an instrument of truth but as we have seen increasingly in recent years, breaches and scandals put trust in the media into perspective. [60]

This issue is amplified when some media outlets allow a lack of truth on their platform. Facebook authorizes politicians to buy advertisement space and create political adverts. In 2019, Mark Zuckerberg, during a hearing in front of the House of Representatives, was asked about those ads and if Facebook would take down untrue ads, a question that the CEO did not answer clearly.[61] Moreover, according to a 2020 study by the Reuters institute,[62] 52% of people would prefer news media to report false statements from politicians rather than emphasize them. If social media platforms as influential as Facebook continue to allow politicians to advertise untrue facts, people will begin to debate whether the media is truly reliable.[63]

In an interconnected world were news travels in the matter of minutes or even seconds, we count on the media to relay accurate information. According to the same study, 38% of people said they trust most news most of the time. This number shows that the majority of people asked are aware that the media does not necessarily reflect the truth. And more than half of the sample said they were concerned about what is true or false on the internet when it comes to news. [64] Even if the media can be manipulated and carries fake news, it is also the job of the reader to find trustworthy sources they can take their information from. Indeed, some journals or news channels do not hide that they are oriented politically, it is then up to people to find unbiased news. Moreover, in democracies the press has the freedom of speech and technically can say anything they want. Even if medias should not present false information, they often present biased information. Someone reading or watching any media should be aware of the bias risk and therefore take it upon themselves to find the more neutral information depending on what they are looking for.

Power of the Media

The media hold enormous power over the public opinion, and thus are able to impart the version of truth that most suits their interests. They are more powerful than any one person as they can choose how to frame public images of people, which is crucial to those peoples public standing.

Truth in the Natural Sciences[edit | edit source]

Truth in Physics[edit | edit source]

How changes in theories of physics occur[edit | edit source]

Physics is the discipline which focuses on "the scientific study of matter and energy and the effect that they have on each other."[65] Central to that discipline is the notion of "truth." Indeed, it is a discipline which perpetually renews itself, with old theories being replaced by new ones and this occurs only when the latter theory comes to be accepted by a wide number of a people as the objective truth. For example, early physicists such as Ptolemy and Aristotle agreed upon the geocentric theory, the view that the Earth is the centre of the universe,[66] and from that consensus arose a truth which was generally adhered to. Later, this view was challenged, primarily by Nicolaus Copernicus who had done research[67], which he believed provided evidence of a different truth: the sun is located in the centre of the universe. It is through the development of comprehensive models of the heliocentric theory, through the demonstration that previous models do not fit a truthful representation of the world, that scientists are eventually able to make this new truth widespread. Indeed, in order for new truths in physics to be accepted, evidence must be provided by multiple academics who all find research pointing to the same truth. This, combined with demonstration of previous discrepancies between models and reality eventually convinces a wider public to adhere to a new truth. The Copernican Method [66] which places Copernicus' own discoveries side by side with Ptolomy's theory is an example of this process.

What does this mean for truth ?[edit | edit source]

With truth we associate the way the world objectively is. However, the changes in physics demonstrate that the truths we know and accept evolve with time? Does that suggest the world has changed or our understanding of it as changed? Truth seems to be limited by its necessity to be supported by a majority of people, meaning the majority is left to determine the truth. Perhaps, the example of Copernicus, illustrates that although the truth can be a minority at one point in time, through sufficient evidence and research the truth will eventually prevail, and become widely accepted.

Truth in the Social Sciences[edit | edit source]

Truth in Anthropology[edit | edit source]

Anthropology is a complex discipline, grounded in both the social and biological sciences; it has even begun to be viewed as interdisciplinary due to such social biological interactions.[68] As such, there is a clear interaction between both objectivity and subjectivity in the discipline.

Truth and privilege in anthropology[edit | edit source]

Discussion around whether a constructivist approach towards anthropology and posing social questions has lead to a disregard for marginalised people is common.[69] Would it therefore be preferable to treat everyone based on an objective truth?

Universities are one of the places where a lot of research is carried out, but also where certain privileges of the researchers may lead to inequalities and misrepresentation of data, and therefore the perceived truth of the discipline. Cultural context in Anthropology is of great importance, yet in one area of the field, namely evolutionary psychology (and human psychology in general), it has been found that many samples are described to be WEIRD; western, educated, industrialised, rich and democratic.[70] This means that current anthropological truths, based on data from WEIRD samples, will not reflect reality. Furthermore, the ethical principle of cultural realism, where human cultures are studied as separate to each other, is attributed to abstract principles usually found in Western society[71], and so these principles can not be seen as a universal truth for the whole of society.

Differing truths of anthropology[edit | edit source]

There exist differing views on which knowledge theories anthropologists subscribe to the most. One view is that anthropologists are naturalists, due to their direct study of subjects and such subjects’ interaction with their environment,[72] in this case representing human behaviour and way of life. Naturalism is considered part of the scientific method[73], where truths reflect reality. As such, Anthropology is considered to be based on rationalism and objective truths here. The Vienna Circle definition of positivism is “knowledge based on experience and logic”[72] and so here Anthropology is considered positivist, as logic is used to reach conclusions in research. On the other hand, it is also stated that facts are found due to an individual’s interest in research, and furthermore that they are interpreted differently by each person. Therefore, truth can not truly be objective in regards to societies and humanity[71], which anthropology studies. This split between subjective and objective truths may be because of the two streams of anthropology: biological and social. It can be seen that all anthropologists need a solid understanding in all knowledge theories that form truth in the discipline, and be able to discuss the inferences between them, in order to prevent issues with truth arising in anthropology.[71][72]

Truth in Politics[edit | edit source]

Politics could be defined as « the activities of the government, members of law-making organizations, or people who try to influence the way a country is governed ».[74]

Politics in social constructionism[edit | edit source]

Politics epistemology seems to be social constructionism. Truth in politics can be sought through quantitative and qualitative methods: to construct data (from interviews for instance) or to understand social behaviors (from focus groups for instance).

A telephone survey of voters during the 2012 US presidential campaign has shown how partisanship information enhances self-efficacy theory. Random North Carolina voters were asked several questions about how they have been and are informed about the election. It shown that most of them sought for partisan information online; rather than simply reading or watching mainstream media. This confirms Albert Bandura’s self-efficacy theory. Following this argument, one can argue that individuals have the ability to find truth in politics on their own. [75]

However, one might argue the opposite. Given the amount of fake news shared during a US presidential election, some say that people don’t behave in a way that enhances truth. A psychological study done by the Pro-Truth Pledge has tried to interfere in this process by giving 12 types of behaviors to signees of the research to adopt. After this, they were much more inclined than before for a seeking of truth. The study included random citizens as well as public figures. Therefore, truth isn't empirical. There are certain behaviours to adopt to find it. [76]

These studies show how truth can be found in different ways; through qualitative as well as quantitative methods which are both related to the constructivist epistemology.

Truth and power[edit | edit source]

Finally, there is a strong debate on wether truth should be dissociated or not from politics. For Theresa Man Ling Lee, truth is today what is fought in wars. She takes the example of the Cold War which was in her opinion a dual between Marxism and Liberalism. But the issue here is that on both political sides the center of power retains the center of truth. Theresa Man Ling Lee puts forward Czech statesman Vaclav Havel argument that in politics the center of power cannot be the center of truth. Instead of deciding between Marxism or Liberalism, Theresa Man Ling Lee proposes the theory of post-modernism which enhances to have truth in politics as considered as subjective or contextual; not as centered and irremovable. [77]

Truth in Psychology - The Illusory Truth Effect[edit | edit source]

The Illusory Truth Effect is defined as the tendency human beings have to believe or find truthful information that they have been repeatedly exposed to throughout their lives. The Illusory Truth Effect is a cognitive bias identified in 1977 in a study at Villanova University and Temple University and it suggests that people in general tend to rely on information that is familiar to them or in line with their already established beliefs. In other words, repeating a certain statement a significant amount of times makes it seem more plausible to the audience.[78]

This effect has been used on many occasions by cults and extremist groups, but is also being used daily in political propaganda, news media, electoral campaigns and advertising.[79] Although this principle has only been identified as of recently, it has been used for centuries: Politicians of Ancient Rome, such as Cato, had used repetition to convince the population of the need to destroy Carthage, and during the 19th century, Napoleon Bonaparte emphasized the power repetition can have on the people. This effect has also been used in Shakespeare's Julius Cesar.[80]

No matter how strong the illusory truth effect may be, it is difficult to nullify the ability of rational thinking. In any such situation, even if the familiarity of the subject inclines the individual to believe it, they can still debate whether the said statement is truthful or false. However, psychologists have found that that familiarity can, in fact overpower rationality in extreme cases.[81]

The Illusory truth effect in psychology adheres to the constructivist idea of truth, as it shows that truth may be constructed by social processes, such as the influence news media websites and presidential speeches may have on the human population.

Truth in Science Studies: a Social Constructivist Approach to Scientific Knowledge[edit | edit source]

Classical Approach to Knowledge in Science[82][edit | edit source]

Traditional conception of Truth within Sciences rests on a positivist view. This approach argues that scientific knowledge is obtained through gathering of empirical evidence (verified data) and interpretation by logic and reason. It is believed that the natural world functions according to general laws ‘awaiting’ to be discovered by scientists then translated into knowledge that is deemed objective, rational and universal. Knowledge offers a mere depiction of the real world.

A challenging reaction: a case for Science Studies[edit | edit source]

Sciences Studies is a recent interdisciplinary field of research. It uses historical, philosophical, sociological, anthropological, economical lenses to study the production of scientific knowledge[83]. Its birth is linked to the emergence of the « social constructivist » conception of knowledge. The social construct concept of reality and knowledge was popularized by the sociological treatise The Social Construction of Reality by Berger and Luckmann (1967): the authors state that knowledge (what we take reality to be) is subjective and produced by humans.[84]. The theory found its first echo in social sciences. It later integrated sociology/ philosophy of science in response to the realist approach to scientific knowledge.

Constructivist Understanding of Sciences[edit | edit source]

The constructivist argues that 'the ‘facts’ [of science] are determined by scientist’s choices, not objective reality'.[85] According to this thesis, scientific knowledge is socially constructed and deprived of its absolute value (positivism).

The two degrees of constructivism[86] :

  1. very strong constructivism: all facts are constructed : there is no independent reality
  2. strong constructivism: facts that we come to process are constructed


Two scales of constructivism’s argumentation:

  1. One can look at the social forces constructing knowledge at the scale of a society:

Scientific knowledge is a product of a particular historical and political context. They are social and institutional factors in the establishment of scientific knowledge : 'explanatory concepts such as interests, conventions, traditions, and socialization'[87] should be taken into account when analyzing it. For example, Foucault argues against the idea of mental illness and treatment in XIX century was an objective scientific discovery. His thesis depicts a conventional bourgeois morality trying to control and suppress identities (labelled as insanity) that didn’t fit its narrative by institutionalizing the "sick". 'The institutions of science produce knowledge which is required by those in power. Disciplines, networks of scientific knowledge and hierarchical regimes of truth in science are mediums of disciplinary power, which flows via science to users of scientific knowledge.'[88]. In other terms, Truth and Power are indissociable according to Foucault and thereby Truth is always socially constructed.

  1. One can also look at the construction of knowledge at the scale of the scientist[89]:
    Facts’ are dependent to human activity. The artificiality of the laboratory and of the scientist’s work were thoroughly questioned by epistemologists. Latour and Woolgar (1979) describe the lab activities — inscription and transcription, transformation and calculation through devices — as means to the construction of the discovery. They use as an example the « institutionalization » of the peptide TRF. The « hard fact » of the peptide structure exists only within certain 'networks', within certain contexts, those in which it is useful. In certain fields and sub-fields TRF is a 'unremarkable white powder'. To recognize TFR as a constructed fact allows a reflexion on how and why is was created, on the purpose it serves (note : TRF structure was discovered). Barnes also states that scientific judgment is determined by professional interests.

A Case against Constructivism: the Danger of Relativism[edit | edit source]

During the Science Wars of the 1990s, a discourse opposing realist scientists and postmodern thinkers, the social constructivist approach was branded as a relativist approach denying the scientific reality of the world. Although this rhetoric was criticized, it highlights an important path social constructivism could lead to: relativism[90]. If one looks at the example of climate change, it is clear different scientific measurements and analysis were brought together to describe and conceptualize the very notion of climate change. It is a phenomenon which doesn’t exist as an entity in the natural world; it is a concept constructed by humans. However, by this, one could be tempted to state the urgency claimed by scientists is subjective and draw conclusions that global warming is not an existential crisis and threat to humanity. Latour said in the climate crisis era:  'Dangerous extremists [climate skeptics] are using the very same argument of social construction to destroy hard-won evidence that could save our lives'[91]

Why is the constructivist approach important in Sciences?: a Nietzschean Wisdom[edit | edit source]

Although Nietzsche’s intellectual relationship to sciences is the utmost complex, one can retain at least one idea pertinent to this subject. He identified all truths to be illusions, beliefs — especially religion — that dominate the world and construct what we take to be reality. Even though he first defines science as 'a self-defense against the truth', he poses the 'the problem of science' as scientific knowledge[92] engaging with the same absolute prospect, of science becoming an ideology of some sorts, becoming a new "dogmatic religion"[93]. Social constructivism forces us to deal with sciences in non-scientific terms and therefore compels us to challenge science epistemological-wise.

Conclusion[edit | edit source]

In this article, we have discussed the various theories of knowledge and forms of truth, and how truth is represented in various different disciplines. The relationship between subjective and objective truth has been explored, and it is discussed whether instead of truth being split into separate theories for each discipline, that it instead is more fluid as a concept and can evolve over time. In addition, we have also explored some applications of truth in society, such as in media, and whether the generally accepted ‘truth’ today is truly representative of humanity as a whole.

References[edit | edit source]

  1. ↑ Aristotle, date=Ist Century BCE. "Metaphysics". {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help); Missing pipe in: |first= (help)
  2. ↑ "positivism | Definition, History, Theories, & Criticism". Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 2020-11-07.
  3. ↑ "Constructivism". Philosophy Terms. 2016-10-27. Retrieved 2020-11-07.
  4. ↑ Scot, Jamie (2014). "A revisionist history: How archives are used to reverse the erasure of queer people in contemporary history". QED: A Journal in GLBTQ Worldmaking. 1 (2): 205–209
  5. ↑ Queer, (sexual politics), dismantling binaries, Encyclopaedia Britannica, Kristen Barber, published January 23, 2017. Accessed November 01, 2020. https://www.britannica.com/topic/queer-sexual-politics
  6. ↑ Local Government Act 1988 (c. 9), section 28. Accessed 01 November 2020, opsi.gov.uk.
  7. ↑ "Knitting Circle 1989 Section 28 gleanings". Archived from the original on 18 August 2007. on the site of South Bank University. https://web.archive.org/web/20070818063344/http://www.knittingcircle.org.uk/gleanings2889.html
  8. ↑ Gallo RC (2006). "A reflection on HIV/AIDS research after 25 years". Retrovirology. 3(1): 72. doi:10.1186/1742-4690-3-72. PMC 1629027. PMID 17054781.
  9. ↑ "Representation", Mitchell, W, in F Lentricchia & T McLaughlin (eds), Critical Terms for Literary Study, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 1990
  10. ↑ "What is straightwashing? When Hollywood erases gay characters from films". Smith, Lydia (20 April 2018). Pink News. Retrieved 01 November 2020. https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/04/20/what-is-straightwashing-gay-characters-hollywood-films/
  11. ↑ Prior, A. N., 1967, ‘Correspondence Theory of Truth’, in P. Edwards, ed., The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, vol. 2, New York: Macmillan Publishing Co. & The Free Press, 223-32.
  12. ↑ David M. The Correspondence Theory of Truth (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) [Internet]. Stanford.edu. 2015 [cited 2020 Nov 3]. Available from: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/truth-correspondence/‌
  13. ↑ O’Connor, D. J., 1975, The Correspondence Theory of Truth, London: Hutchinson.
  14. ↑ Aristotle. The metaphysics. Mineola, New York: Dover Publications, Inc; 2018.
  15. ↑ Crivelli, P., 2004, Aristotle on Truth, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  16. ↑ Aquinas T. Summa Theologica. Boston: Mobilereference.Com; 2010.‌
  17. ↑ David M. The Correspondence Theory of Truth (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) [Internet]. Stanford.edu. 2015 [cited 2020 Nov 3]. Available from: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/truth-correspondence/
  18. ↑ PhilPapers Survey (conducted in 2009; cf. Bourget and Chalmers 2014)
  19. ↑ 2004, Veritas: The Correspondence Theory and Its Critics, Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
  20. ↑ a b Bo, Chen (2015). "Social Constructivism of Language and Meaning". Croatian Journal of Philosophy. 15.
  21. ↑ de Saussure, Ferdinand (1916). Cours de linguistique générale. {{cite journal}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  22. ↑ Boghossian, Paul. "WHAT IS SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION?" (PDF). Retrieved 2020-11-01.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  23. ↑ "What is Linguistics? | Linguistic Society of America". www.linguisticsociety.org. Retrieved 2020-11-01.
  24. ↑ Hickmann, Maya (2000-06-29). "Linguistic relativity and linguistic determinism: some new directions". Linguistics. 38 (2): 409–434. doi:10.1515/ling.38.2.409. ISSN 0024-3949.
  25. ↑ Winawer, Jonathan; Witthoft, Nathan; Frank, Michael C.; Wu, Lisa; Wade, Alex R.; Boroditsky, Lera (2007-05-08). "Russian blues reveal effects of language on color discrimination". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 104 (19): 7780–7785. doi:10.1073/pnas.0701644104. ISSN 0027-8424. PMID 17470790.
  26. ↑ Pham, Le Quyen (2016-01-01). "Nietzsche on Language and Our Pursuit of Truth". The Expositor: A Journal of Undergraduate Research in the Humanities.
  27. ↑ Frege, Gottlob, Basic Laws of Arithmetic translated and edited by Philip A. Ebert and Marcus Rossberg, Oxford University Press, 2013
  28. ↑ Carnap, Rudolf, The Logical Syntax of Language translated by Amethe Smeaton, Open Court, 2002
  29. ↑ Truth at WebCite
  30. ↑ "The Analytic/Synthetic Distinction," The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2020 Edition) at WebCite
  31. ↑ "The Analytic/Synthetic Distinction," The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2020 Edition) at WebCite
  32. ↑ Putman, Hilary, Historia Mathematica 2 "What is Mathematical Truth?", Harvard University Press, 1975
  33. ↑ Askphilosophers.org. (2019). Questions | AskPhilosophers.org. [online] Available at: http://www.askphilosophers.org/question/4316 [Accessed 24 Oct. 2019
  34. ↑ Mullen L, Truth in Photography: Perception, Myth and Reality in the Postmodern World, University of Folrida; 1998; 2-3.
  35. ↑ Oxford Literary Review Vol. 32, No. 2, The Truth in Photography (2010), pp. 191
  36. ↑ Oxford Literary Review, Vol. 32, No. 2, The Truth in Photography (2010), pp. 19
  37. ↑ Shapter M, Are Photographs Truthful? Whence Veracity? Lady Stephenson Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2PA, UK, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2018, British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
  38. ↑ McMaster, S. R. (2017). Truth in photography: How I learned to stop worrying and press the shutter. The International Journal of the Image, 8(2), 77-98.
  39. ↑ Oxford Literary Review, Vol. 32, No. 2, The Truth in Photography (2010), pp. 19
  40. ↑ Shapter M, Are Photographs Truthful? Whence Veracity? Lady Stephenson Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2PA, UK, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2018, British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
  41. ↑ Lowenthal D. The Frailty of Historical Truth: Learning Why Historians Inevitably Err | Perspectives on History | AHA [Internet]. Historians.org. 2013 [cited 3 November 2020]. Available from: https://www.historians.org/publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/march-2013/the-frailty-of-historical-truth
  42. ↑ Finding Truth in History [Internet]. Farnam Street. 2020 [cited 3 November 2020]. Available from: https://fs.blog/2017/10/finding-truth-history/
  43. ↑ Cambridge dictionary, Definition of Literature. 2020 [online]. dictionary.cambridge.org [2 November 2020]. Available from: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/fr/dictionnaire/anglais/literaturee
  44. ↑ Aristotle, Poetics, ch. 24.
  45. ↑ Maupassant de, Guy. Pierre et Jean - preface 1888
  46. ↑ Stendhal, The Red and the Black. 1830
  47. ↑ Plato, Republic, 601a.
  48. ↑ Avrane P. Vingt mille lieues sous les mers [online] Encyclopedia Universalis. 2020 [2 November 2020]. Available from:http://www.universalis-edu.com/encyclopedie/vingt-mille-lieues-sous-les-mers/
  49. ↑ Nāgārjuna, Kasawara K, Müller F, Wenzel H. The Dharma-samgraha: an ancient collection of Buddhist technical terms. Oxford: Clarendon Press; 1885.
  50. ↑ Rodriguez E. Saṃvṛti-satya | Buddhist concept [Internet]. Encyclopedia Britannica. 2016 [cited 2 November 2020]. Available from: https://www.britannica.com/topic/samvrti-satya
  51. ↑ paramārtha-satya [Internet]. Oxford Reference. 2020 [cited 2 November 2020]. Available from: https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100305499
  52. ↑ Keown D. A dictionary of Buddhism. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2004.
  53. ↑ a b Harvey, Peter (2012), An Introduction to Buddhism: Teachings, History and Practices, Cambridge University Press
  54. ↑ Garfield, Jay L.; Priest, Graham (2003), "NAGARJUNA AND THE LIMITS OF THOUGHT." (PDF), Philosophy East & West, 53 (1): 1–21, doi:10.1353/pew.2003.0004, hdl:11343/25880, S2CID 16724176
  55. ↑ Nagarjuna, Mūlamadhyamakakārika 24:8–10. Jay L. Garfield|Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way: pp. 296, 298
  56. ↑ Loundo D. THE 'TWO TRUTHS' DOCTRINE (SATYADVAYA) AND THE NATURE OF UPĀYA IN NĀGĀRJUNA. Kriterion: Revista de Filosofia. 2016;57(133):17-41.
  57. ↑ Williams, Paul, Buddhist Thought: A Complete Introduction to the Indian Tradition, 2002, pp. 70
  58. ↑ "Media definition and meaning". www.collinsdictionary.com. Collins English Dictionary.
  59. ↑ Browne, Foreign Office Minister Jeremy (7 April 2011). "Role of media in society" (in en). Foreign & Commonwealth Office. GOV.UK. https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/role-of-media-in-society. 
  60. ↑ Corner, John (1 October 2017). "Fake news, post-truth and media–political change" (in en). Media, Culture & Society (SAGE Publications) (Vol.39 (7), Media, culture & society): pp. 1100–1107. doi:10.1177/0163443717726743. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0163443717726743. 
  61. ↑ "About Ads About Social Issues, Elections or Politics". Facebook Business Help Center. Facebook.
  62. ↑ Newman, Nic (22 May 2020). "Overview and Key Findings of the 2020 Digital News Report". Reuters Institute Digital News Report. Reuters Institute and Oxford University.
  63. ↑ Davies, William (19 September 2019). "Why can’t we agree on what’s true any more?". The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/sep/19/why-cant-we-agree-on-whats-true-anymore. 
  64. ↑ Newman, Nic (22 May 2020). "Overview and Key Findings of the 2020 Digital News Report". Reuters Institute Digital News Report. Reuters Institute and Oxford University.
  65. ↑ Cambridge Dictionary. "Definition of Physics".{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  66. ↑ a b Weinart F.Copernicus, Darwin, & Freud: Revolutions in the History and Philosophy of Science. Wiley Blackwell: 2009. pp3-4.
  67. ↑ Copernicus N. De revolutionibus orbium coelestium. 1543. Available from:https://search.proquest.com/docview/2090309346?&imgSeq=11
  68. ↑ Smith, E., Gurven, M. & Mulder, M. (2011) Anthropology: it can be interdisciplinary. Nature 471, 448 https://doi.org/10.1038/471448b
  69. ↑ Christensen, T. (2019) Look Away: How the Social Constructionist Approach to Social Problems Channels Attention Away from the Marginalized. Am Soc 50, 271–289  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12108-019-9413-9
  70. ↑ Rad, M., Martingano, A. and Ginges, J. (2018) Toward a psychology of Homo sapiens: Making psychological science more representative of the human population. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(45), pp.11401-11405. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1721165115
  71. ↑ a b c Moore, H. (2005). The Truths Of Anthropology. Cambridge Anthropology, 25(1), 52-58. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23820720
  72. ↑ a b c Borofsky, R. (1994) Assessing Cultural Anthropology. New York: McGraw-Hill, pp.168-176.
  73. ↑ Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica (1997), Singh, S. (2007) and Rodriguez, E. (2017). Naturalism | Philosophy. [online] Encyclopedia Britannica. Available at: https://www.britannica.com/topic/naturalism-philosophy [Last Accessed 1 November 2020].
  74. ↑ POLITICS | meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionary [Internet]. Dictionary.cambridge.org. 2020. Available from: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/politics
  75. ↑ Riffe D. Kiffer M. Leder Elder S. (2018) Finding the Truth in Politics: An Empirical Validation of the Epistemic Political Efficacy Concept. Atlantic Journal of Communication (Volume 26, 2018, Issue 1, p1-15). Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15456870.2018.1398162?casa_token=0DPFhZhp3q4AAAAA%3Apei1WDVzCzaoqHvGt1gDtXpghMAzRgM88z7zQrsK599H1rGSUKjf-_McuQK83Cxq8loCy-P0JFCSFg
  76. ↑ Tsipursky G. Votta F. Mulick J. A. (2018) A Psychological Approach to Promoting Truth in Politics: The Pro-Truth Pledge. Journal of Social and Political Psychology (2018, Vol. 6(2), p271–290). Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15456870.2018.1398162?casa_token=0DPFhZhp3q4AAAAA%3Apei1WDVzCzaoqHvGt1gDtXpghMAzRgM88z7zQrsK599H1rGSUKjf-_McuQK83Cxq8loCy-P0JFCSFg
  77. ↑ Lee T. M. L. (1997). Politics and Truth: Political Theory and the Postmodernist Challenge. State University of New York Press. Available from: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=OovPLrlrarQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=politics+and+truth&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwib3NXa5u3sAhVzpHEKHcS-AHMQ6AEwAHoECAEQAg#v=onepage&q=politics%20and%20truth&f=false
  78. ↑ Hasher L, Goldstein D, Toppino T. Frequency and the conference of referential validity. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. (1977) doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(77)80012-1. [Accessed the 2nd of November] Available from: https://web.archive.org/web/20160515062305/http://www.psych.utoronto.ca/users/hasher/PDF/Frequency%20and%20the%20conference%20Hasher%20et%20al%201977.pdf
  79. ↑ Newman J, Sanson M, Miller K, Quigley-Mcbride A, Foster L, Bernstein M, Garry M. People with Easier to Pronounce Names Promote Truthiness of Claims. PLOS One (September 6, 2014). [online] doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0088671.[Accessed the 2nd of November] Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3935838/.
  80. ↑ Hertwig R, Gigerenzer G, Hoffrage U. The reiteration effect in hindsight bias. Psychological Review.(1997). doi:10.1037/0033-295X.104.1.194. [Accessed the 2nd of November] Available from: https://web.archive.org/web/20120822145544/http://www.mpib-berlin.mpg.de/volltexte/institut/dok/full/hertwig/hrreipr__/hrreipr__.html
  81. ↑ Maynard I, Anas A, Farinacci S. Dissociation of Processes in Belief: Source Recollection, Statement Familiarity, and the Illusion of Truth. (Ontario, Canada) McMaster University Hamilton, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General Vol. 121. No. 4.446-458 (1992)[Accessed the 2nd of November] Available from:http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.220.6486&rep=rep1&type=pdf
  82. ↑ Boyd, Gasper and Trout, et al, The Philosophy of Science, MIT Press, 1991, pp.37-57
    https://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=fr&lr=&id=pEzcsK1wlVYC&oi=fnd&pg=PR11&dq=positivist+philosophy+of+science&ots=iWm4DeaQQS&sig=zXcVh4bExC89ey5Q9rQx03MrUgg#v=onepage&q=positivist%20philosophy%20of%20science&f=false
  83. ↑ Sergio Sismondo, An Introduction to Science and Technology Studies, Blackwell Publishing, 2004, pp.64
    http://www.homepages.ucl.ac.uk/~ucessjb/S3%20Reading/sismondo%202004.pdf
  84. ↑ Micheal Lynch, Social Constructivism in Science and Technology Studies, Springer, 2016, pp.101-104
    file:///Users/ninotchkahood/Downloads/Lynch2016_Article_SocialConstructivismInScienceA.pdf
  85. ↑ André Kukla, Social Constructivism and the Philosophy of Science, Routledge, 2000, pp.3
    https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=AFmkqMbS0LoC&pg=PR7&hl=fr&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=2#v=onepage&q&f=false.
  86. ↑ André Kukla, Social Constructivism and the Philosophy of Science, Routledge, 2000, pp.8-12
    https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=AFmkqMbS0LoC&pg=PR7&hl=fr&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=2#v=onepage&q&f=false
  87. ↑ Knorr-Cetina, Epistemic cultures : how the sciences make knowledge, Harvard University Press, 2003
    https://www.worldcat.org/title/epistemic-cultures-how-the-sciences-make-knowledge/oclc/1039575616?referer=di&ht=edition/ UCL Science Library
  88. ↑ Gary Gutting, Johanna Oksala, Michel Foucault, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2003 revised in 2018
    https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/foucault/#HistMadnMedi
  89. ↑ Latour and Woolgar, Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts, Princeton University Press, 1979, pp.105-148
    https://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=fr&lr=&id=vJ-JueUwptEC&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=laboratory+life+the+social+construction+of+scientific+facts&ots=yU0wiS1E2U&sig=n2iHB1weB01TacONgWlQWhrOG_I#v=onepage&q=laboratory%20life%20the%20social%20construction%20of%20scientific%20facts&f=false
  90. ↑ Micheal Lynch, Social Constructivism in Science and Technology Studies, Springer, 2016, pp.109
    file:///Users/ninotchkahood/Downloads/Lynch2016_Article_SocialConstructivismInScienceA.pdf
  91. ↑ French philosopher calls for new ‘critical attitude in academia’, Stanford News, 2003
    https://news.stanford.edu/news/2003/april16/latourtalk-416.html
  92. ↑ E.Babich, « The Problem of Science » in Nietzsche and Heidegger, Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia, 2007, Vol.63, pp.207-208
    https://www.jstor.org/stable/40419516?seq=3#metadata_info_tab_contents
  93. ↑ Paul Valadier, Nietzsche, Epistemology, and Philosophy of Science, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 2004, Vol.204, pp.241-242
    https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-94-017-2428-9_19
Retrieved from "https://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=User:Nicola.georgiou/sandbox/Approaches_to_Knowledge/Seminar_group_13/_Truth&oldid=3767447"