TED Conversations

This conversation is closed.

What is truth?

This question stemmed from a discussion on the subjectivity with religious doctrines in religion. How do we know what 'truth' is? Is truth true because an individual believes it, is it relative or definite? This question can be extended past religion to let's say, academia, politics, law and morality.

Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Nov 9 2012: Truth is simply the state of energy at any particular instant.

    We sense some of this energy, but our senses are selective and full of signal noise.
    We then take the data of our senses and run it through an adaptive matrix to convert sense data into cognitive "information" ( static and causal maps) - this process is called "perception" or "belief" (both words mean the same thing).
    The perceptive mechanism is also prone to noise, but it is adaptive enough to sustain the survival of the organism.
    There will always be a gap between truth and perception because of the time-lag in the mechanics of constructing and updating information maps.
    However, causal maps have the ability to predict the energy state. This compensates for the time-lag gap.
    Predictive causality is very noisy, however it is self-noise-reducing through continual prediction-->observation-->map-update.
    Any method that refines the process of observation results in better noise-reduction in our causal maps. Hence the scientific method.
    Regardless of all this, the causal maps must remain adaptive, and will only approach truth on a statistical basis - there will always be some margin of error.
    In other words, we will never know the absolute truth, but we must always move towards it.

    In this way, for humans, truth is a journey - not a destination.
    • thumb
      Dec 4 2012: Energy, and time (a particular instant) are two parameters that are subject to Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Which means that we can never measure both exactly - regardless of the accuracy our equipment.

      Another consequence of quantum mechanics is that we can never be the neutral observer. As soon as we start observing a system, we interact with it and therefore alter it.

      My point being that absolute truth is not just something we can never know, but something that doesn't exist.
      • thumb
        Dec 4 2012: I believe so.

        I think what we see in the Heisenburg uncertainty is a fractal reflection of what happens in levels above the quantum limit.
        These days, I am seeing things as entropy waves. That any pattern is a "self" - and that every self is a negentropic wave standing positive of the universal entropic gradient.
        I propose that the positive nengentropic envelopes defining a self produce a spacial and temporal field of super-entropy which stands negative of the universal entropic graident.
        I believe that the universal entropic gradient is conserved - just as Newton observed in energy - the super-entropic balances the negentropic - and that the field is a potential created by a self.
        That the greater slope of the super-entropic field is conducive to formation of more selves by virtue of the greater potential of entropic gradient in the super-entropic field.
        This causes a fractal occupation of these fields culminating in the quantum particle - which presents a potential gradient that is near-vertical and cannot be occupied by smaller selves without the gradient becoming absolute-vertical(singularity).
        That a field cannot be measured without placing a self in it - and then the self becomes the measurement.
        So .. electrons might very well be no more than potential fields - and the particles we see being smashed out of them are created at the occupation caused by the collision.
        Fields attract things because of the entropic slope in them - and things get stuck there because teh trailing half of the super-entropic field is negentropic when compared to the at-rest gradient.
        I also note that the zero-point crossing from teh negentropic self to the super-entropic field is occupied by the boundary of the self - often indicated by a porous membrane. In animals we call it "skin".
        The trailing edge of the negentropic envelope also contains part of teh increased gradient - this promotes the action of symbiosis.
        It's not constrained by the arrow of time. The fields go both ways.
        • thumb
          Dec 4 2012: I am sorry, but this doesn't make much sense and I don't see how it this should bypass uncertainty and reveal an absolute truth.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.