(Untitled)

May 16, 2006 09:18



Read more... )

Leave a comment

ninedeadleaves May 16 2006, 00:31:40 UTC
One of the two below is a lie.
Nothing is entirely a truth.
Lies, given time, can become truths.

Reply

___vespertine_ May 17 2006, 01:43:22 UTC
The first one? Or the second?
Ahhhhhhhhhhhh I don't know. I think the first one is the lie, but if so I want to hear your theories on the second.

Reply

ninedeadleaves May 17 2006, 02:18:03 UTC
I'd like to hear your theories on the matter first.

Reply

___vespertine_ May 19 2006, 07:52:38 UTC
Well. I guess it depends whether there are any objective 'truths', or if we make a statement and believe it to be entirely true (but perhaps it's not), does that make it subjectively true? Or, if we make a statement believing it to be a lie but it actually does turn out to be true, does that make it in fact a truth and we just weren't aware of it?

Do you believe there is anything such as an 'objective truth', and does believing something make it subjectively true, or is it all far too grey for the black and white terms of 'true' and 'false'?

Reply

fred_mackay May 19 2006, 17:49:18 UTC
My head is now a self contained black hole.

Reply

ninedeadleaves May 21 2006, 22:41:36 UTC
Truth is a tricky one. You and I can say 'television has been the greatest technological achievement to change the course of civilisation in the last hundred-odd years', but that doesn't make it necessarily true. If it hadn't come into existence, maybe we'd be traveling down a far more enlightened path; maybe there are infinitesimal futures we could have been marching towards without the advent of television. (Bad example, but I caught a bit of eurovision last night by chance.)
I think that ultimately, we colour the world with our perceptions, and attribute qualities where there aren't necessarily anything but facts.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up