truth should first based on what was already there in the first place

which is the Universe and the forms , materials , and the forms taken in the micro and macro which allows us to discuss TRUTHS in the first place

this is the fundamental ultimate depth of TRUTH

Truth comes from both sides - the spiritual doesn't make physical evidence invalid! However the physical is much more limmiting, since we don't even understand all the peices of our one little universe yet! .

Furthermore, many can still misinterpret the spiritual things as well, since we all find out what we need through different paths - the path isn't as important as the outcome. Applying a spiritual guide to a physical world doesn't work so good, cause many of the guides can contradict eachother when takin literally!
Spiritually, none of these guides contridict any truths - and if you learn a little about metephores, all spiritual guides (including all religious texts/scriptures) are full of truth, just not the kind of truth a strictly logical mind can see.

Brilliant minds from the best scientists in the past all saw both sides! Maybe you should learn a little more about the scientists that did the majority of the work that lead us to where science is today. Einstien was very spiritual, and was all about absurd possibilities. Newton wrote a translation of the bible's metephores. Davinci was involved in everything including spirituality. And that's just a couple I know of off the top of my head.

“ Originally Posted by (Q)
If the truth came from the supernatural where all physical laws are meaningless and magic reigns, everything would be the truth. And, if everything is the truth, nothing is the truth.



Questions and answers are meaningless in a world where anything and everything are possible.



I suspect one would need to be able to use their mind in order to open it., wouldn't you say? [/quote]


both the physical and the spiritual are not even comparable , apples and oranges here guys

however the spiritual depends on the physical since , without the physical how can the spiritual manifest , whether in any form

I am not misusing it. That's what is is there for. If I do a bitwise comparison of (0 or 1) the answer is one:

128|64|32|16|8|4|2|1

0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0
or
0|0|0|0|0|0|0|1

=0|0|0|0|0|0|0|1

(0 or 1)=1

(1 or 0)=1
(1 or 1)=0 (this is an AND statement making the result false)

(1 or 0)=1 (True)

Bitwise comparisons are programmed to give a result, and they can be programmed wrong! I have read truth tables that are false.

On a side note 1-1=0 (false!)

this is basicly what i had in my post that got deleted..

anyway..spectrum..how would we tie this into 'what is truth'?
hmm..how bout..

truth and truth = truth
nontruth and truth = nontruth

truth or truth =truth
truth or nontruth = truth

im starting to confuse myself...lol

when trying to find the answer for 'what is truth',truths and nontruths are both part of the equation..
is this what you are trying to say??

so are truths based on the physical things that make us or are truths about mathematics ?

perhaps two seperate threads are needed here

I will say this though , without the truth of the physical things , on which mathematics is based on ( the essence of why your here in the first place ) then mathematical truths are abstract from reality and physical truths are based on reality

i would classify math as a physical truth..so you are asking to choose between A and A...

i think the original intent was just to see how computer logic would fit into what truth is..

TRUTH TRUTH TRUTH
The word TRUTH is just a word, afterall. To a blind person, who does not see this world, still can spell this word, this fact is a representation of truth in itself. This means seeing something is not a true representation of truth (because this blind person can still spell this word and believe in the existence of this word!)

Therefore, when we ask this blind person the ideas of truth, he might say, "I believe truth is a word, although I cannot see it, but I believe it is a word that means truth!". So he believes something that he does not see, how wonderful!"

To a Christian, believe in God is not believing in Truth, because there are other religions in the world that all have different representation of Gods. Therefore, we must look at the Truth itself, beyond religions. We say God is Truth, this is a statement used again and again by the church, but it is not exactly right. God is God, and Truth is Truth, they are two different things. Essentially, God is a being, and Truth is a unchangeable fact. Anything that changes is a truth(the first type of common truth) undergone transformation from one truth to another truth. For instance, the water boils at 100 C, this is an observed fact, so it is true! And liquid water becomes steam, this is also true. The hot water can scald, this is true also. However, such facts are only true on earth, and on a different planet, these figures may change, so these truth change. This kind of interpretation of truth is rather scientific, but it does lead us into a deeper Truth.

A powerful scientific truth comes from Newton's three laws of nature. These laws are so powerful so everything seems to hold true when applied upon. Animals, including humans, will die when no air is supplied, this is such a powerful fact, and no one can say this is untrue! Fish, can swim in water only, this is so true, how can one disprove it? All these are powerful statements of facts and they are true, and they are not God.

So why is God Truth? I shall attempt this extraordinary question next time...

Mod Hat:

Not in this subforum you won't.
Move off over to the Religion subforum for that discussion.

Truth is nothingness. Truth doesn't exist, whatsoever. It's simply a word humans use to put meaning behind things.

truth is relative..

I think some post speaking about specific truths and showing how they relate to concrete things might make this discussion more useful. I can't even find enough to know if I agree or disagree.

Truth is the name of any probable or existing state which can occur between the reign and the interpretations of reality.

Imagine there is no human on earth. Imagine they have never existed. You can imagine the age of dinosaurs for instance. So we isolated the human element. Was it "true" that all living things on earth could not go to outer space due to the capacity of living organisms, gravity as well as impossibility of survival in outer space. And it was nothing to do with "nothingness". The reign of reality and its truths for living things were there. Yes, you have a truth condition here without "humans putting meaning behind things". Whether we define it or not, there are some realities which impose their truths over dependent mechanisms.

Do you think that a dinosaur would use the word "truth" to put meaning behind something?!?!?! NO! They're vocal cords etc. are constructed differently.

The term "truth" is a symbolisation made by English speaking humans. If you are meaning that. I was focusing the physical conditions of dinosaurs, not our description of them.

Well, that's why I said a word used by humans.

I disagree

the TRUTH is , is that no matter what I call something it still is what it is

for example , water , no matter what I call it or how I define it , water , you ,we , simply can't go a month without it , water

we will die otherwise and that is a FACT , hence a TRUTH

further

all combinations of atoms > molecules > result in certain forms

from rocks to concrete to trees to water to air etc

and thats because thats all these combinations can do

water , H2O does not become the form of a rock , because H2O simply can't

the Universe has limits and thats a TRUTH or TRUTHS really

TRUTH or TRUTHS comes down to understanding that the Universe has LIMITS

A fact is not the truth.