User talk:JREverest/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge/2020-21/Seminar group 6/Truth

To the author of the "Truth in the Memory of La Resistance in France",

Hi, I have read your part and I think it is quite interesting. However, whilst reading it, I came up with an idea of maybe adding a paragraph about how truth about the resistance in France is portrayed in literature and film? If you agree, could I maybe try to add something about it? Hellllothere (discuss • contribs) 19:00, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Dear Hellllothere, Thank you for your comment. That's a great idea! I recommend checking out "le chagrin et la pitié" that aims to tackle the question of truth in La Resistance and was quite controversial when it came out.

Thank you for your contribution, I think its brilliant!

To everyone, I'm going to try and condense my title (I'm aware it is way too long); if anyone has any suggestions I would appreciate them thanks! Blacklipstick (discuss • contribs) 00:51, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, I do not know whether this is of any help, but a shorter (although only a bit) version could be - The Impact of Subjective Truth and Conflicting Evidence on Treatment in Psychology. Hellllothere (discuss • contribs) 09:37, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

To the author of "Truth in the Perception of Political Actions"

I thought your analysis of political sociology was extremely interesting and the distinction between the different perspective was so interesting to explore. I thought maybe you could add examples to illustrate how these political perspectives form beliefs which lead to individual truths. Ex- you could look at a political issue that has been debated or is currently debated by analysing the different political sociological standpoints people take which lead to certain beliefs and truths. As an example you could explore immigration laws as it would be quite interesting to explore the different standpoints from a real life example as I believe it would really help to clarify and support your argument. This is just a suggestion, you can use any other examples, I hope this is helpful! :)))

To the author of Truth in Philosophy
I found your topic extremely interesting! I have elaborated on how the idealist theory have developed into more contemporary coherence theory, and what is it stand on truth. I think that addition of contemporary theories of truth in philosophy could aid your paragraph, as the they have developed and change their understanding of truth within this discipline! If you want to we can add another paragraph about correspondence theory or other neo-classical theory of truth? Let me know, and I hope this is helpful :). --Dearenemy (discuss • contribs) 13:23, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi again, I have moved paragraph on coherence theory here for you to approve it. Is it okay for me to insert it into your topic? --Dearenemy (discuss • contribs) 13:32, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I approve it 100%, good addition! Icloneseashells (discuss • contribs) 14:17, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi!

I was very interested by your subject and conducted my own research on truth in philosophy. It could be interested to do a subsection in the duty of truth. Here is what I found:

There is a debate in philosophy as to the right to access truth. Indeed, a dilemma stands between our own interest and the duty of truth. Indeed, the Philosopher Benjamin Constant defended the position that truth is not a duty and that everyone is entitled to a lie as long as it is not absolutized, else it loses its efficiency. This paradox stands as if lying is universalized then I cannot tell a lie as the other person knows it is a lie rendering it useless. On the other hand, Kant supports the duty of truth as he stresses the fact that the human is a societal being and society is a contract. (Kant I, Constant B, Barni J. Le droit de mentir. [Paris]: Mille et une nuits; 2003) Hence a lie is a betrayal to this contract and by implication a crime against humanity. The example of the Dreyfus Affair shows that a society is entitled to truth and that there is an actual duty to find the truth.

Bascrzm (discuss • contribs) 20:14, 9 Novembre 2020 (UTC)

Coherence theory
One of the neo-classical theories of truth originating from idealism is the coherence theory of truth. It assumes that a given belief is true, only if it is in coherence with a system of beliefs. Coherence theories have usually been a part of idealism philosophy. In 1906, an idealist philosophically Joachim stated that "Truth in its essential nature is that systematic coherence which is the character of a significant whole." Neo-claasical coherence theory departs form the idealism by rejection of monism of truth. It sees truth as a feature of beliefs systems, in which all beliefs are related to each other. --Dearenemy (discuss • contribs) 13:32, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Response to Interpretation of History: where does the truth lie?
Dear writer of this section, Your contribution caught my attention as I found it very interesting and well illustrated with good examples. However, I would like add something in regard to your ending which suggests that taking into account as many perspectives as you can will enable us to get the true history. Would it ever be possible to get a completely true history? Facts keep on flowing in day by day therefore 'true' history and our knowledge/understanding of it would need to be updated constantly. Moreover, I have found an interesting commentary of Tolstoy's view on history in an essay by Isaiah Berlin in 1953 'The hedgehog and the fox' (you can easily find a pdf of it on the internet). It mentions and presents history as an impenetrable fog and knot that can never be untangled due to the infinity of opinions, views, experiences that have happened. History cannot just be based on hard facts like dates and events but taking into account a wide range of different experiences generates more questions in regard to the truth in history. How many experiences taken into account is enough to get a true history? When is it enough to get to a concrete truth of a historical event? Who decides when and how? Isn't the more we will take into account the less clear history will be to understand? I believe that adding this view could make your contribution more complete and developed. You can check out the pages from 443-444 and 456-459 of Berlin's essay to get a general view of Tolstoy's opinion on history. Hope all this makes sense and that you find it relevant! Romarinlavende (discuss • contribs) 14:13, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

That sounds really interesting. I will try to write something about it and then you can look over it and see what you can add! Thanks

Also to the writer of this section, I noticed that you don't currently have any citations for this section, is this something that you are still working on? I would be happy to help if you need. Onchesilbeach (discuss • contribs) 00:33, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Yes I am working on it now thank you!

Truth in Conspiracy theories
Hey Truth in Conspiracy theories, should we add up our two contributions since mine seems to be an example of yours? I wrote about the Flat Earth theory. I Just put them together, what do you think?
 * Hey! Great idea it would be a great way to illustrate my contribution ! 128.86.177.101 (discuss) 10:29, 10 November 2020 (UTC)