It would be interesting to know how you define truth. The best definition I’ve heard is that truth is the recognition of reality.
That’s true as far as it goes. But the maxim begs the questions of what is the “reality” that is capable of being “recognized” (Being)? And how it is recognized (Knowing)?
For me to be able to “define” Truth, I would have to be able somehow to stand “outside” of it. And if I were capable of doing that, then you would have no reason to trust anything I had to say….
But I am not capable of doing that; i.e., of standing outside Truth; for I believe that it constitutes the fundamental structure of Reality that includes me “as part and participant.”
All I have to go on are insights and observations direct and indirect of what Truth IS. Though I can’t “define” it, I can describe it. My list of descriptions would include the following:
Truth is One, unchanging, and eternal. That is, it is timeless and spaceless. It has universal reach, from first to last, from least to greatest. Nothing in the phenomenal or moral worlds is outside of its domain.Possibly I could expand on this list. But there’s enough there already I think I’ll just stop.Truth is at once transcendent to and immanent in the world of human knowing. It is transcendent in that it did not arise in the world of human knowing; it wasn’t “created there.” Rather, the entire phenomenal world and the world of human knowing are its products. This is to recognize the way Natural Law theory expresses Truth.
Truth is immanent in these worlds (phenomenal and conscious) as what we might call the paradigm or specification of the universal order of the universe in its evolution over time. It accounts for the fact that though there is astonishing diversity in the world of Nature, still the fundamental oneness and identity of Nature is never disrupted by its diversity, but persists over time as the manifold of this diversity.
For the great classical philosophers, Truth is the eternal act of Divine Nous (Mind). With Plato (and I daresay Aristotle too), Truth is so closely associated with Goodness, Beauty, and Justice, that one is led to conclude that these are but different manifestations of one Substance — Truth — viewed under different aspects. And the entire Cosmos (universe) is the manifestation, or “image” (eikon), of this eternal act viewed under the conditions of space and time. But the “eternal actor” is not in time, nor in space. He/It is the God Beyond (i.e., transcending) the Cosmos, the Source of its truthful order in space and time.
In the Judeo-Christian tradition, Truth is the Word of God “in the Beginning,” i.e., at the divinely-willed inception event of all that there is or ever will be — the Creation. Christianity makes explicit the unity of God and Truth in St. John’s Gospel:
In the Beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men. — John, 1–4The Word of God, the Logos, was made manifest in the Incarnation of Christ. Christ is at once the Logos of creation and the Son of God. Another divine Name for Him is Alpha and Omega, “First to Last” (i.e., first cause and last cause, incorporating immanent cause in the evolutionary flow of space and time in between). Thus does Christianity acknowledge the absolute universality of Truth as Creator and Lord of Life.
As for the human relation to Truth, I find St. Anselm’s observation answers very well for me. In the Proslogion XV, he wrote:
Oh Lord, you are not only that than which a greater cannot be conceived, but you are also greater than what can be conceived.Which is why I said earlier that I can’t “define” truth, only describe it. For how can I — or any other human being — “define” the unconceivable?
Substitute the word “Truth” for “Lord” here — which is an entirely legitimate operation from both the classical Greek and Christian points of view — and we recognize how dependent we humans are on an eternal criterion that we did not specify, but which is operating in the world of human experience. And the challenge it poses: It clearly puts the divine and human into two entirely different orders or “categories” (or “dimensions”) altogether. Truth is the only bridge between them.
From the scientific standpoint, Truth is the foundation of the universal physical and moral laws.
And Truth is the one single standard by which questions of true or false can be answered.
In the end, Scripture is instructive on this point:
Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. — Colossians 2:8 [KJV]Another translation of the same verse:
See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ. [? — help!!!]Colossians 2:8 is clearly stating that divine Truth — the Logos, Christ — is the “measure” that prevents us from being deluded into false propositions. Left unaided by Truth, philosophical doctrines are equally as bad as bad science, and thus equally deleterious to human well-being.
Must leave it there for now, dear OldNavyVet. Thank you ever so much for writing!
Which is why I said earlier that I can’t “define” truth, only describe it. For how can I — or any other human being — “define” the unconceivable?
Amen. "Truth" is the mind of God. We can perceive it all around us, but we can never understand it completely.
Your observation about the observer problem I think is apt. A fish doesn't know he is wet. Yet we live in a world of truth and lies, life and death, ugliness and beauty.
The truly transcendent things are almost undefinable. What is beauty? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder I suppose, and sometimes in the eye of the beer holder.
;)
Thanks for the post dearest sister in Christ.
Well put, as usual.
Thx Thx.
Regarding the words "... the maxim begs the questions of what is the “reality” that is capable of being “recognized” (Being)? And how it is recognized (Knowing)?" ... I was reminded of my catechism-day saying that "God made me to know him, to love him, and to serve him in this world and the next"; and the phrase "to know" in there is telling. It requires a deep and abiding faith.
I admire that, and I help the nuns that brought it to me.
Old Navy: It would be interesting to know how you define truth. The best definition I’ve heard is that truth is the recognition of reality.
Spirited: Truth as defined by Jay Budzishevski (a student of the great thinker, CS Lewis) is everything that we “can’t help but know is true.”
In this category are mind, conscience, and free will, for we can’t help but know that we think, reason, theorize, imagine, dream, feel guilt, and make choices on a daily basis. By extension of this truth, we know that we really do know that monism, whether pantheist or materialist, is not true because monism denies the reality of individual mind, conscience, and free will.
We really do know that among the higher order of creatures and even of plant-life that there are but two sexes, male and female. We know this is true by the reality of male-female distinctivess, by simply looking at nature, by what works and what does not, and by the consequences we incur when our actions are in denial of these truths.
For instance, horticulturalists know that both male and female plants and trees are necessary for good results. Breeders of animals know that they cannot expect to increase herd size by “pairing” two males or two females.
All men know that truth exists by the lies they tell. We know that reality exists by the fact of our longing to escape it by way of daydreams, fantasy, fiction, etc.
What we really can’t help but know is true turns out to be common sense.
But I am not capable of doing that; i.e., of standing outside Truth; for I believe that it constitutes the fundamental structure of Reality that includes me “as part and participant.”
Only God knows objective truth. Only He speaks it.
When God says something, it is. It is because He says it.
The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. [There is] no speech nor language, [where] their voice is not heard. – Psalms 19:1-3
Conventionality (leaving aside that this begs the question how conventionality is obtained) stipulates that justice demands responsibility for one’s actions. Without Free Will, the concept of justice is irrelevant, nonexistent even (as is the concept of responsibility). Not so much as a subject to be brought up, or an issue to be raised.
Taking, for a moment, the other side of this controversy, we may observe that many of the most desolately miserable cultures on this earth deny the remotest possibility of Free Will, yet impose unbelievably savage punishments on individuals for actions they are helpless to avoid. Somewhat more comprehensible is the level of sympathy for criminality displayed by those elements of Western Civilization who have chosen to substitute a theology of ‘Science’ for the Judeo-Christian Tradition so long prevalent in Western Civilization. It’s inhumane, after all, to condemn people for actions they cannot avoid committing. Yet, this standard is not applied uniformly. Conservatives are condemned for their beliefs far in excess to the moral condemnation heaped upon criminals for their actions (one is tempted to think that Conservatives would be herded into concentration camps if it were not for it being a step too far to be attempted at present).
I wish that I possessed more sophistication in Science and Philosophy than I do, but I appreciate your willingness to include me just the same. I can attest from my own experience to the human misery produced by the denial of justice, as can, I think, we all.
And spirited irish, allow me to thank you for your post #122. One of the more illuminating expositions I’ve had the privilege of viewing in quite some time.