'Are we entitled to our own truth?'

[Nearly Sane]

Why is it you can never discuss the subject at hand , but degenerate to nit picking?

I am discussing it, I am pointing out that you are inconsistent in your thinking on it.

[Bubbles]

I am discussing it, I am pointing out that you are inconsistent in your thinking on it.

Not really, different countries are inconsistent.

Are we entitled to our own truth? The answer is inconsistent, depending on the country you are in.

[Nearly Sane]

Not really, different countries are inconsistent.

Are we entitled to our own truth? The answer is inconsistent, depending on the country you are in.

I still don't see how inconsistency related to the article, could you reference the bit in the article you see this point being relevant to?

[Bubbles]

I still don't see how inconsistency related to the article, could you reference the bit in the article you see this point being relevant to?

I've taken the article wider than it actually is.

But lots of people having their own truths means they are inconsistant.

inconsistent
ɪnkənˈsɪst(ə)nt/
adjective
1.
not staying the same throughout.
"police interpretation of the law was often inconsistent"
2.
not compatible or in keeping with.
"he had done nothing inconsistent with his morality"
synonyms:   incompatible with, conflicting with, in conflict with, at odds with, at variance with, differing from, different to, in disagreement with, disagreeing with, not in accord with, contrary to, in opposition to, opposed to, irreconcilable with, not in keeping with, out of keeping with, out of place with, out of step with, not in harmony with, incongruous with, discordant with, discrepant with; More
Feedback


Because people's beliefs, if everyone has their own truths, are inconsistant.

So it's asking if this will lead in the end,  to the demise of democracy.

I took it further because one area where people have their own truths is in religion and they expect their truth to be honoured.

I was also thinking that in places like Saudi Arabia you are not allowed to express your own truth, and freedom of expression is curtailed unless it fits in with approved Islamic " truths".

Religion as in creationism is a personal truth held by some who want an equal status of their truth being taught in schools. If that happens in some schools but not others that makes teaching inconsistant.

Although he doesn't mention those things, it was what sprang to mind.

If I'm inconsistant it's probably that I see lots of different angles you could approach this, depending on the country you lived in.

[SwordOfTheSpirit]

#30

OK, that is an answer
however judging from many of your posts you accept things without 'observational evidence' to be true.
Why is that, Sword?

Because in some cases, faith is necessary, e.g. when the evidence is not observational.

#32

Okay, but which ones will you reject, or not accept?

Pretty much anything that tries to get round the problem of an external cause being responsible for a gain, by claiming that it is an increase, so can therefore come (emerge) from itself.

#33

Having done Chemistry, the damage that some acids (e.g. sulphuric, hydrochloric acids) can do has been verified, so I can accept these.

So, since you accept knowledge regarding the actions of acids as being justified: ...

Knowledge that has been verified.

then presumably you'd agree that the basis of the justification needs to be sound for the associated knowledge claim to be accepted as sound: yes?

Where this is possible, yes.

[Gordon]

Because in some cases, faith is necessary, e.g. when the evidence is not observational.

Then you need a non-observational basis to evaluate what is claimed as evidence - such as?

Pretty much anything that tries to get round the problem of an external cause being responsible for a gain, by claiming that it is an increase, so can therefore come (emerge) from itself.

Which presumes an 'external cause', which in this case would be begging the question (a fallacy), followed by yet more personal incredulity (another fallacy).

Where this is possible, yes.

If justification isn't possible, or the justification doesn't stand scrutiny, then you have speculation and not knowledge.

[SusanDoris]

Thank you for a direct answer!
Maybe, the main difference between believers and non-believers is that the latter have faith in millions of things, but all of those things are backed up by observational evidence. If that evidence has as yet many gaps   and needs many more years of tests still to do, then it’s a ‘don’t know’ and remains that way until it becomes knowledge.

What is it, do you think, that encourages you to believe things on 100% faith? Could you perhapsmention a few?

[Walter]

NO

[Hope]

To 're-visit' the OP question: probably.  We all experience life in different ways, and what might be overbearingly hot for some might be pleasantly warm for others, or porridge might be the only 'real' breakfast cereal for some, whilst it might be Corn Flakes or Shredded Wheat or All Bran for others.*

Similarly, if you live permanently at an altitude of, say, 2000m, the boiling point is always going to be different to that for someone who lives permanently at sea level.

Does Christmas always occur in the winter?


*PS, other cereals are available.