Truth - A Person of Interest

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lorenz_Michael
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Lorenz_Michael

Guest
Would you agree or disagree with the following statement?

The truth is a person.

Peace+
 
Anything is possible. I see no evidence that truth is a person, but if it could be shown I would be swayed.

The same holds true for these statements:

**Suffering is a color.

Existence is a dog.

Happiness is a warm gun.

Paradox is not a paradox.**
 
Mike_from_NJ said:
Anything is possible. I see no evidence that truth is a person, but if it could be shown I would be swayed.

The same holds true for these statements:

**Suffering is a color.

Existence is a dog.

Happiness is a warm gun.

Paradox is not a paradox.**
Click to expand...
The the original statement being considered starts with “The…” which makes the above statements given difficult to apply in comparison.

How about-
The truth is a person (possible, under consideration)
The ant is an insect (constantly true)
The sky is a balloon (false)
The lie is a person (possible)

Of the lie, we can constantly say it must at least originate from a person.

Can the same be said for the truth, that it constantly originates from a person?
 
Lorenz_Michael said:
The the original statement being considered starts with “The…” which makes the above statements given difficult to apply in comparison.

How about-
The truth is a person (possible, under consideration)
The ant is an insect (constantly true)
The sky is a balloon (false)
The lie is a person (possible)

Of the lie, we can constantly say it must at least originate from a person.

Can the same be said for the truth, that it constantly originates from a person?
Click to expand...
Well I listed concepts like truth that just don’t happen to use the definite article, but that’s neither here nor there.

So you’re asking if it’s possible if the truth can come from a person. Could the truth be former boxer Carl “The Truth” Williams? Could I be the meaning of life? Could character actor Eddie Deezen be the source of all love?

As I noted before I see no reason for the the truth to be a person, but I’m willing to be convinced. What’s your pitch?
 
I remember reading about a “Sojourner Truth”… do you mean that one???
 
dshix said:
If we take this in the characterization that God is Truth, then the answer is yes. Otherwise, this is nonsense.
Click to expand...
We’ll definitely include that, but just for the sake of this argument and allowing it to progress in a logical sequence to its conclusion, let’s see how it develops from the original statement.
 
Mike_from_NJ said:
Well I listed concepts like truth that just don’t happen to use the definite article, but that’s neither here nor there.

So you’re asking if it’s possible if the truth can come from a person. Could the truth be former boxer Carl “The Truth” Williams? Could I be the meaning of life? Could character actor Eddie Deezen be the source of all love?

As I noted before I see no reason for the the truth to be a person, but I’m willing to be convinced. What’s your pitch?
Click to expand...
Let’s consider the truth to be definitive, not just probable. If we agree that truth is available materially, conceptually, rationally and discernable allegorically, then the fullness of truth, the truth, if sought would need to encompass personhood.

Msy it then be concieved that in searching for the truth we are definitely, and not probably searching for a person able to encompass the fulness of truth?
 
petra22 said:
I remember reading about a “Sojourner Truth”… do you mean that one???
Click to expand...
Thank you, an interesting women who applied the truth to her life and others, perhaps we could say someone truly following the truth.
 
Jesus Christ is the Truth.

Lots of early Christian stuff calling him “Truth” or “Truth Himself.”

That is an axiom, not an argument.
 
Lorenz_Michael said:
Would you agree or disagree with the following statement?

The truth is a person.

Peace+
Click to expand...
Boredom makes people ponder the strangest things :rolleyes:

We have trouble convincing pro-choice people that a pre-born baby is a person, never mind an intangible concept.

I submit that one of the qualities of personhood is self-awareness. I don’t believe truth can be self-aware.
 
Yes, John 14:6, “I am the way, the truth and the life.”

Since Jesus is the truth, and a person, I totally agree with that statement, He is also a person of interest!!! As I am very interested in Him…
 
seagal said:
Boredom makes people ponder the strangest things :rolleyes:

We have trouble convincing pro-choice people that a pre-born baby is a person, never mind an intangible concept.

I submit that one of the qualities of personhood is self-awareness. I don’t believe truth can be self-aware.
Click to expand...
Would strongly argue that an unborn child is a person precisely because both the truth and the child are tangible.

But that’s a very interesting statement to also submitted on self awareness and personhood. So would you then say that the statement,* I am the truth* includes an element of self awareness that excludes personhood.

Peace+
Michael.
 
I want to break these statements down bit by bit so that I’m not misconstruing what you’re saying or using different definitions for words than you are.
Lorenz_Michael said:
Let’s consider the truth to be definitive, not just probable.
Click to expand...
I don’t have any objections to that, assuming you’re saying there is a single truth.
If we agree that truth is available materially, conceptually, rationally and discernable allegorically,
Click to expand...
There is a great deal we don’t know and some things we will likely never know. Sure some things we can suss out, but not all things.
then the fullness of truth, the truth, if sought would need to encompass personhood.
Click to expand...
What do you mean by “encompass personhood”? Does the truth not also encompass many other things? Is there any true thing that the truth does not encompass?
 
Mike_from_NJ said:
I want to break these statements down bit by bit so that I’m not misconstruing what you’re saying or using different definitions for words than you are.

I don’t have any objections to that, assuming you’re saying there is a single truth.

There is a great deal we don’t know and some things we will likely never know. Sure some things we can suss out, but not all things.

What do you mean by “encompass personhood”? Does the truth not also encompass many other things? Is there any true thing that the truth does not encompass?
Click to expand...
Well let’s agree for now that truth would need to have a cause in order for there to be a single truth, though many effects of truth may lead to that same truth.

Yes, we may discern many things, even from the most limited amount of information at hand, as long as we hold to the truth, or else error and possible delusions may result.

If personhood and truth were to encompass one another, then they would necessarily need to be the same thing, or start by that assertion. In the case of the fullness of truth, the person would need to be of a profound nature.

Peace+
michaEl?
 
Mike_from_NJ said:
I want to break these statements down bit by bit so that I’m not misconstruing what you’re saying or using different definitions for words than you are.

I don’t have any objections to that, assuming you’re saying there is a single truth.

There is a great deal we don’t know and some things we will likely never know. Sure some things we can suss out, but not all things.

What do you mean by “encompass personhood”? Does the truth not also encompass many other things? Is there any true thing that the truth does not encompass?
Click to expand...
Sorry, missed a couple of bits in replying to your last response.

Yes, we would need to firstly agree on the on the terms we are using, that they be properly qualified and relate to the same thing, so agreeing on the description ‘round window’, would necessitate both of us being to conceive of both of these terms and relay them to each other in order to relate information accurately, that is truthfully, to one another.

And yes the truth may encompass all things, including lies and fiction, as long as it is accurately expressed. Eg “the sky is made of bananas is a lie” is a true statement that encompasses a lie. So yes, the truth may encompass all things. Well a person that is able to encompasses all truth, we could say a person who is the truth, would need to know all things or have the facility to know all things, real or otherwise and be able to accurately and with stability bound all things. I suppose this, to me, is one avenue in approaching the understanding of the term God as defined in theism, and I imagine that the truth being a person, in this context, would lead to some interesting conversations.

Peace+
michaEl?
 
Mintaka said:
Jesus Christ is the Truth.

Lots of early Christian stuff calling him “Truth” or “Truth Himself.”

That is an axiom, not an argument.
Click to expand...
Yes, as a Catholic I accept this an an axiom of Christian faith. Yet an atheist would not necessarily hold this to be an axiom, giving rise to the argument under consideration.

Even for the Christian there are different ways at arriving at this axiom. And it is of interest to see how a person would reach the position of holding this axiom as valid or not. Eg By simply believing what has been relayed to them as being true(blessed are those who believe and have not seen) or because of a profound encounter(eg the apostles Thomas and Paul) or because they practised the teaching of Jesus and have constantly found them to be true and of benefit. Eg love one another, love your enemy or *give to those that ask of you *; practices leading to an experienced verification of the axiom.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top