Truth; Relative Or Not

[the Ogre]

Do you believe in EVIL? GOOD? TRUTH? Just wondering.

Do you mean common secular definitions? No. Do I accept certain definitions? Yes, but they are my own and I derive those from my understanding of the scriptures and LDS theology. What is evil for one person might be different for me. I think this is the same for most people.

Here is an interesting concept: for mortality there is no absolute good or absolute evil. Only G-d is absolutely good as H-s antithesis is absolutely evil. In the same vien, there is no absolute truth or untruth. Mortality is not capable of it. I can not give a perfect understanding of evil or good, only approximations. The example we were discussing on another thread (the sexual abuse of a child) is an aproximation of evil, but the definition is highly personal. If you feel similarly, there is a connection between the two of us, but if you do not then there is no connection only a difference.

This is where for me the examination is interesting, the study of connections and differences between faiths and theology as opposed to confirming or denying truth claims from different theologies, philosophies, religions, or moral positions regardless of their claims to reason or unreason and the ensuing dialogue between diverse groups. I do know what is true for me most of the time (though not always), but I do not seek to know the truth as defined by other mortals only the conversations between multiple groups and individuals. Other truth claims are for the most part not that interesting execpt in the conflict that comes from such claims and the then claimants.

Am I interested in truth? Yes, but only that of G-d and how H- defines it. Anything else is suspect and can not be seen as absolute, only approximation. The conflicts of approximation, though, are interesting and worthy of examination. The truth of G-d is actual and real just like the light of the sun or the gravititational pull of the earth, moon, sun, and stars, but like the truth of G-d, these actualities are not completely understood (and why the work of Albert Einstein is still theory-general and special reletivity and brownian motion) and are still studied and like theological discussion, I find the conflicts more interesting then the truth claims or the individual truth claimants.

If truth is relative as I seem to feel, what is the point of considering it as truth instead of as claims or framed arguements regardless of how smart they seem?

[Annabelli]

Our understanding of Truth is most often talked of in terms of color. While white is reserved for God, black is compounded to include all the colors of the universe. Most people can consider truths in hew of their beliefs.

I think Truth falls in the concept of learning "one line at a time." I believe that as we build a testimony, we are able to accept more Truth.

[Dr T]

When people say "There is no truth" I laugh because in that statement they hold to the premise that they are saying something meaningful. If truth really does not exist, then that statement is self defeating.

[Elphaba]

When people say "There is no truth" I laugh because in that statement they hold to the premise that they are saying something meaningful. If truth really does not exist, then that statement is self defeating.

Hi Dr. T,

Who tells you there is no truth?

Elphie

[Dr T]

Good point El. I understand the concept of "truth" give us some difficulty but when people say it is completely relative, they are still making a truth assertion. If all truth is relative, then that statement is self-defeating.

[prisonchaplain]

I believe the philosophy we are grappling with--one that has largely become dominant--at least amongst younger people--is postmodernism. To oversimplify, it claims there is not objective truth, but rather that truth can be relative. Whatever works for you. On the positive side, Anti-Mormons are largely lost with post-moderns. History doesn't matter--so long as this faith works for me, it's good. Likewise, for Christians in general. Many nonChristians welcome our prayers. Afterwards, they'll often smile and say that the experience felt good and was meaningful.

On the other hand, it is very difficult to get postmoderns to to maintain philosophical and doctrinal loyalty. For the most part, they just don't care.

I know I've oversimplified this matter--but hopefully, I've caught the ssence of it.

[Gabelma]

Truth is what happens whilst we are busy getting on with our lives - what is true and what happens doesn't change but our perceptions of it do change as we grow and learn more.

I remember a bit of flint I found at an excavation as a student, personally I thought it looked like a chip off a stone made by a tractor, the second year student thought it was a half made knife, the third year supervising student thought it was a point of a knife that had broken off- the Professor in charge of the dig declared it to be a scraper (used for removing meat from bones a very effective tool) - so because that is what the bigwig thought - it is now offcially a flint scraper. Had I been doing it it wouldn't have had a record at all and would have been tossed aside, the only thing unusual about it that lead me to ask was the fact it was in an area where flint doesn't occur naturally. Through all this the piece of flint didn't change and the truth is only the person or animal that brought it to the spot, the piece of flint and Heavenly Father know the Truth concerning what it is. But the record contains the most accurate description availible to us at this point.

-Charley