Despite having been utterly killed and humiliated in class, I believe I have a pretty good idea of what makes an objective truth. It’s nothing! In my opinion there is no such thing as an objective truth, although we are not many students in HL not one of us was told that our truth was completely objective. No matter how well thought out something may be, everything can arise questions (the cover of Entourage is proof of that).
All it takes is one person to make an objective truth subjective. It doesn’t matter who that person is, but if they disagree with your truth and have some kind of evidence then by definition it is no longer an objective truth. There is no way to know whether anything in the world is an objective truth. We may have accepted something as people, a universal truth, but it doesn’t mean that it is an objective truth. A universal truth simply signifies the best opinion or answer that someone has presented. For example, for thousands of years it was a universal truth that the earth was flat; however, then somebody came up with a more ‘provable’ idea and that became the new universal truth. The fact is that both of them were universal truths but as shown in the example in doesn’t mean that it is an objective truth. For all we know in 300 years or so mankind will find out that the world is in fact a different shape. We cannot come up with an objective truth because there aren’t any. However, that doesn’t mean that all ideas are equally subjective.
A universal truth is formed when the majority of the people on earth agree with a statement. As seen in class, no one had an objective truth, but some people did have better statements than others. I unfortunately was on the wrong end. Moreover, the amount of evidence you have while presenting your argument determines how subjective your truth is. Some people spend their entire life on research in order to prove that their statement works; their goal is to get as many as they can to agree with their statement. This may be confusing, but because there is no objective truth the world functions and competition exists. Even though there is no objective truth, the goal is to make your statement as objective as it can be. Once, you have achieved that then people live by the notion that your statements is as close to the truth as they can get. So, because there is no objective truth, you should always try and prove somebody else’s theory wrong in the hope that somebody will start looking for answers. If enough people question a truth then eventually somebody will come up with a better one.
Objectives truths don’t exist, and it’s for the better. It allows improvement in ideas and propels people to question everything.
Wow, Akash. You wrote down my thoughts exactly. I don't believe in objective truth either. After all, what I understand to be the definition of objective truth is that it is universally undeniably true. As long as there is one person to doubt it, it is no longer objective. All it takes is a "minority of one," to quote George Orwell.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you think about this idea: we can't disprove that our world is an illusion, so all the laws and theories that apply to it may also be illusions. Do you agree with this theory. We already have one idea in common, and I was wondering what you thought of this one.