Tell me the whole truth and nothing but the truth....
By wheel416
@wheel416 (1019)
Canada
January 2, 2009 4:17pm CST
Is there such a thing as an absolute truth?
People talk about telling a lie or telling the truth, but what is truth? Is there truth or only perception? Is there one reality, or other multiple realities each unique to each of us? What is truth?
For example, take a simple case of being an eyewitness to a robbery. Studies have shown, that not every person, will see a single event exactly the same. Research has shown that if there are 10 people that witness a robbery, they will probably report different things. One person, may remember what the person was wearing, another, will estimate height, a third will contradict the shirt colour, of the first witness. Yet another person will distinctly remember facial hair, while someone else is convinced the perpetrator was clean shaven. The combinations, and variations are endless.
Which one of them is right? Who is telling the truth? Are they consciously lying?
I ask you to consider if there is an absolute truth? What is truth? Is there a reality? Or is there only an individual's personal perspective? What is the truth, if those 10 people, see the same event, and see several different things?
What do you think of truth, and how it relates, to our own opinions were perceptions.
As always, your responses are greatly appreciated.

2 people like this
9 responses
@grandpa_lash (5225)
• Australia
2 Jan 09
I don't think we can assume there are any absolute truths. Even scientific truths are unsure, since new discoveries often supersede them. However, I think we can claim an absolute "perceived" truth - where one is as true as possible to what one believes is the truth.
Your witness example is simply an issue of perception and interpretation, and lying would only come into the equation if the witness has some vested interest, either in the result of their evidence, or in their preconceptions (he must be guilty, he's black/arab/long-haired), so that they unconsciously slant their recollections and perceptions.
The problem with my concept of absolute "perceived" truth lies in the unfortunate fact that there are so many contradictory perceptions of truth: all the differing religious and political truths, for instance, or the ascetic/ecstatic dichotomy (moralists versus libertines) and so on.
Cultural relativism, the concept that one can only judge another system from within its own cultural perceptions is an attempt to take relative truths into account, but unfortunately even that brilliant heuristic tool has become concrete to the point that it allows no value judgments at all. The original; idea was that one could view, for example, female genital mutilation as a "truth" within the culture that uses it but still have the moral right to condemn that part of the culture, not because it is different from yours but because the act itself is "absolutely" immoral. Or at least I think it is, but am I correct? Are any of us ever correct in an absolute sense? Therefore we have no right, say modern cultural relativists, to make nay judgment at all, we can merely report and record.
Lash
3 people like this
@sharra1 (6340)
• Australia
3 Jan 09
You make an excellent point here. Where people are involved it is not possible to reconstruct an absolute truth. A camera will record an action reasonably accurately but people will not always remember it accurately and there can be many reasons for it.
Add to that all the cultural and religious biases and you have a lot of difficulty tracking down the truth. Then there are all sorts of truths. There are cultural and moral "truths" which are not really truths but beliefs. I was thinking of this as a case of remembering or recording an action.
It is hard to go dig into an account and try and remove all the baggage in order to see the action that took place and try and interpret what it is telling us.
1 person likes this
@wheel416 (1019)
• Canada
9 Jan 09
Thank you to both of you for your thoughtful responses. I'm sorry that it has taken me so long to get back to you. Both of you have managed to touch on what I was trying to get out with this posting. An act, in itself is not morally right or wrong. It is our perception that determines whether something is right or wrong.
Until you had put it in this discussion Lash, I had not heard of the term cultural relativism, but it fits for what I've been trying to describe. It is our societal perception, that determines what is right and wrong, not necessarily the action itself. As societal perceptions and cultural beliefs vary widely from region to region, this is how we manage to get opinions and attitudes on the most controversial topics in our world today.
Thank you so much for chewing on the truth with me!
@sharra1 (6340)
• Australia
3 Jan 09
The truth is what really happened. If a camera recorded the whole event and you could see what happened with total clarity then that would be the truth. The people who say what they think they saw are saying what they think is the truth.
They are not consciously lying but the mind does not always remember things are they are. Memory can be a very tricky thing. Some people will remember accurately and others will think they remember something but will be incorrect. They are not lying but their mind has changed things. No idea why. Maybe it is filling in blanks to make sense of what it saw or maybe it is confusing two images into one. Shock can also block things from the mind to avoid repeating the pain.
It can be hard to sort out those who tell the truth and those who lie. As for the reports. Each of those people will probably remember different things and if you put all their stories together then you might get a good whole out of it or at least a good idea.

@sharra1 (6340)
• Australia
3 Jan 09
It does not matter if the camera is there or not the truth of what happened is the same but with a camera present it makes the police job so much easier.
I was talking about actions and events. There are many types of 'truth' or what people call 'truth'. In the incident that you mentioned you are talking about a specific series of actions and what actually happened. In such an event like that a camera filming the entire thing sees the actions in its range.
The truth of what actually happened is the same whether it is seen or known. That is the same old argument of did something happen just because it was not witnessed. Lots of things happen that are not seen or heard. The truth of what happened is always there regardless of whether you find it or not.
If you are talking about truth as some sort of abstract thing then you are in a very different situation. That sort of 'truth' is different for everyone. Moral 'truth' is an individual thing. It is not real truth it is simply belief and belief is not truth.
@wheel416 (1019)
• Canada
3 Jan 09
I could not agree with you more. Sorry if I came off as sounding short, I haven't been feeling well today and I actually went to bed and slept for 2 1/2 hours, something I never do. Take care and thank you for responding. Hopefully, tomorrow will be a better day and I can post a more thoughtful response. I just seem to have a serious case of brain cobwebs today.
No intelligent responses coming from this head today!

1 person likes this

@annjilena (5618)
• United States
3 Jan 09
the truth for some is a cloud of smoke they would have you to believe they are telling the truth and all the times they be lying.some no they are lying and try to make you believe the truth.so i think lying can be multiple.like you said if 10 people saw a accident all of them will have a different story to tell.but lying is what i hate they lie about things to make themselves look good.
@uditpanda (1023)
• India
11 Jan 09
hello wheel416
I think you are partially right. Its the perceptions of different people that may be relative to themselves but the truth is always absolute. If fact I would say in the whole world its only the truth that is absolute. Truth is always fixed. Our perceptions about certain even may differ according to our senses,understanding & mental make up , but one thing will always hold good.That will be the truth & nothing else.Truth is not dependent on anything or any evidence to stand. It stands alone & has the self existence. But we do take help of evidences & opinions to establish our conclusions.
@JenInTN (27514)
• United States
3 Jan 09
Everyones truth is truth according to them. Peoples perception and understanding of things is very different from one another therefore giving us not truth but truths. I once took a communication class in which we all at the same time were given instuctions to follow as to reach an end to a project.To get a certain answer.Each and every one of us in the class took the instuctions in a different manner and come to a different end. It didn't mean we didn't listen.It meant we had different perceptions of what we were being told.Truth is what we believe to be true.There is a reality but it's the way it's seen as to what your personal truth is.
As for the 10 people..you would have to take all their truths and put them together to get your truth.lol
@kttribal (252)
• United States
11 Jan 09
well i dont know if true honesty is possible. like you said they all see it from diffrent points of view. to all these people they are probubly tell what they believe to be true. even if it doesnt match. i know that im not the best at telling the truth all the time. most of the time its not really lying because at the time i say it most of the time i do believe it.
@lilaclady (28206)
• Australia
2 Jan 09
hmmm that is real deep thinking, but you are right I guess people see things differently, I guess we all take a snapshop of things in our brain, and i guess we look at different things in some ways but manye it has something to do with just what sort of memory we have, like i have no memory for numbers, and yet some people are so good at that...but you certainly have hit on a good topic here..
@barehugs (8973)
• Canada
3 Jan 09
There are many different truths. Your truth and my truth can be quite different. Some people (especially Christians) are convinced that truth never changes, that its carved in stone. But history has proved that truth is ever changing. In the dark ages it was ok for Christians to burn those accused by the Church of witchcraft. That is no longer the truth. At one time it was a cardinal sin the eat fish on Fridays, but that truth too has changed. There can be no Absolute Truth, because absolutely nothing in this dimension is static, (except change). The old saying," what goes up, must come down, a truism since the beginning of time, went up in a cloud of smoke with the first rocket to the moon.
@eviltormentor (68)
• Mauritius
3 Jan 09
well for each witnesses their opinions wud be the absolute truth bt when they will hear abt the other opinions i doubt that they might find it to be the truth








