Is it possible to obtain a fixed truth?

[cicero117]

Many philosopher has debated the issue regarding truth along years since the ancient world, however it seems that each of them has a different approach in defining what "truth" is.

In the middle ages for example, church is the one set the standard for what "truth" is. To the extent that they deem Galileo's heliocentric theory as a heresy, however during the enlightenment it is discovered that Galileo's theory is actually correct.

In today's world where scientific discoveries are thriving, we are so adamant that what we think or what we have discovered is the fixed truth, how do we know that we are indeed "correct"?

[Veritas Aequitas]

It is impossible to obtain fixed truth because there are no fixed grounds to ground any fixed truths.

Theists claim whatever their God proclaims are fixed truths.
But since the emergence of the idea of God, no one has been able to provide empirical and philosophical justification that God exists as real.

The secular who claim there are fixed truths are the bigots who ground their justification on the psychological impulse of bigotry.


Truth is generally defined as correspondence to reality.
But the problem is the question of whether reality itself is something that is fixed and awaiting discovery. Philosophically, there is no such thing as a fixed reality awaiting discovery. Reality is an emergence that is entangled with the human conditions,i.e. humans are the co-creator of reality in which humans are part and parcel of it.

In the search via correspondence with reality, humans construct specific Framework and System of Truths to generate specific truths. One of this is the Scientific Framework.

The most reliable truths we have today are scientific truths but they cannot be fixed since by default Science never claim certainty for scientific truths.
What are scientific truths are merely inductive inferences from human observations of reality but it objectivity is reinforced with intersubjective consensus.
Despite scientific truths are of the highest veracity, they are at best polished conjectures of reality and definitely are not fixed truths.

As for the other Framework and System of Knowledge and truths, their degree of veracity are judged against the degree of truths from the Scientific Framework and its reliable justification processes. For example legal truths cannot be as reliable as Scientific truths in general.

So it is impossible to derive absolute fixed truths.

[PeteJ]

Yes, it is possible, Were it not possible mysticism would not exist.

I share you view of definitions of truth in western thought. Generally hopeless. It is not acknowledged that true knowledge is identical with its object. There is no other kind, for all other knowledge may be doubted. Descartes saw this, and this explains his choice of axiom.

It's a big topic that is a mess in academic philosophy, where the best one can do for knowledge is 'justified true belief'. Don't expect much more sense from theists either, for they don't usually believe in Knowledge and prefer to put their trust in faith.

Big topic.

[Advocate]

Experience itself is the only truth you can be completely certain of. Logic and math, for example, always produce the same results, they are as certain as possible but their usefulness is contingent upon matching with reality in an external, empirical sense.

universal taxonomy - evidence by certainty
0 ignorance (certainty that you don't know)
1 found anecdote (assumed motive)
2 adversarial anecdote (presumes inaccurate communication motive)
3 collaborative anecdote (presumes accurate communication motive)
4 experience of (possible illusion or delusion)
5 ground truth (consensus Reality)
6 occupational reality (verified pragmatism)
7 professional consensus (context specific expertise, "best practice")
8 science (rigorous replication)
-=empirical probability / logical necessity=-
9 math, logic, Spiritual Math (semantic, absolute)
10 experience qua experience (you are definitely sensing this)

[Impenitent]

if you can get it to hold still long enough to put a cast around it, you can fix a broken truth as you would any limb...

-Imp

[PeteJ]

In today's world where scientific discoveries are thriving, we are so adamant that what we think or what we have discovered is the fixed truth, how do we know that we are indeed "correct"?

Scientists and speculative philosophers are well aware they may not be correct. They deal in theories, not truth and falsity. This is the methodology.

You won't find a satisfactory definition of truth in Western thinking. The nearest thing to truth seems to be 'justified true belief', which is clearly not certain truth or knowledge.

Truth is what you know is true. Otherwise it is a rumour or theory.

Certain knowledge is only attainable by identity, such that knowledge is identical with its object. (A point I believe Aristotle makes somewhere, and which explains Descartes' choice of axiom) ). This would be why only mysticism offers a path to a knowledge of 'fixed' truths. (A point made by physicist Paul Davies in his book 'Mind of God)

When you say 'I am' you know perfectly well you are correct. This is an example of Truth and Knowledge. Thus 'Know Thyself' is the only path to certain Truth and Knowledge. Then we have no need for beliefs, justified or not. '

[surreptitious57]

The only possible truth that could be classed as absolute is logical truth because logic is deductive
Truth from experience is less absolute because perception is subjective and is therefore unreliable

a priori deals in knowledge derived from logic whereas a posteriori deals in knowledge derived from experience
a priori is therefore more reliable than a posteriori because logic is not determined by subjective interpretation

[roydop]

Many philosopher has debated the issue regarding truth along years since the ancient world, however it seems that each of them has a different approach in defining what "truth" is.

In the middle ages for example, church is the one set the standard for what "truth" is. To the extent that they deem Galileo's heliocentric theory as a heresy, however during the enlightenment it is discovered that Galileo's theory is actually correct.

In today's world where scientific discoveries are thriving, we are so adamant that what we think or what we have discovered is the fixed truth, how do we know that we are indeed "correct"?

The fixed (Absolute) Truth you are seeking is found in/as thought free Awareness. All thought is exactly not absolute truth, but relative, relating only to the illusion.

However, humanity is so deeply engaged in the ultimate confirmation bias that we cannot break the spell of Maya. That bias is: thought confirms the validity of thought. Mind/thought has been completely accepted by human consciousness to be the ultimate authority on truth. It is not. In fact it is the driving force of the cycle of Samsara/suffering.

How do i know? My internal monologue has almost completely died. 90% of my previous thought processes have disappeared, along with 90% of my problems. I now spend most of my days sitting in absolute (not relative to conditions) happiness.

But no one at a philosophy discussion forum wants actual conclusion to the discussion, they just want more confirmation bias.

[RCSaunders]

Many philosopher has debated the issue regarding truth along years since the ancient world, however it seems that each of them has a different approach in defining what "truth" is.

In the middle ages for example, church is the one set the standard for what "truth" is. To the extent that they deem Galileo's heliocentric theory as a heresy, however during the enlightenment it is discovered that Galileo's theory is actually correct.

In today's world where scientific discoveries are thriving, we are so adamant that what we think or what we have discovered is the fixed truth, how do we know that we are indeed "correct"?

This question really belongs in epistemology, but it's silly, anyway.

Truth is what is actually known, and there is a great deal of very, "Certain Knowledge."

300 years ago, philosophers, theologians, and academics declared all of the following things impossible. The certain truth we now know is that:

That electric lighting is possible.
That heavier than air flight is possible.
That refrigeration is possible.
That sound and pictures can be transmitted electronically anywhere in the world.
That getting to the moon is possible.
That X-rays are possible.
That anaesthesia (painless surgery) is possible.
That bacteria cause disease.
That vaccination is possible.
That lasers are possible.

Do you really not know how we know they are correct?

[Nick_A]

God is the eternal unchanging yet the universe is in constant change. A fixed truth is what Plato called one of the Forms. How is this possible? A big topic

[Greatest I am]

I think therefore I am, is a fixed truth.

So is, you live.

Right?

Regards
DL