Support us | Click here ←
'The truth does not exist'
"Is that really true?
'Sure
'Then your proposition is also not true and truth exists anyway.'
'Okay, I THINK That truth does not exist
'Sounds reasonable! Then let's use reason and thought as a starting point to examine the reasonableness of (objective) truth.'
There is the well-known Indian story of the 6 blind men who feel an elephant at a fixed point and each has to describe what they think an elephant looks like. One stands by the trunk and thinks of a snake-like creature, another by a leg and thinks of a column. The next by an ear and thinks of pieces of cardboard. So on and so forth.
Some believe that this is an illustration of different truths (relativism; to each his own). But they are, of course, merely different perspectives on one truth. And the truth is quite present; after all, that elephant is standing there. It is rather the limitation of the individual that it is not (h)recognized as a whole. However, all perspectives together already give a better picture. The real question, then, seems to me 'is (objective) truth knowable'.
Truth is knowable in part through our rationality. You can also know truth intuitively or in other ways. That is legitimate, but when we start thinking about it or discussing it, we also need some rational arguments.
You cannot think about yourself, the world or any subject without realizing that there is logic behind it. We think our thinking leads somewhere. We think arguments can be valid or invalid. Why? From a purely atheistic-evolutionist point of view, this is not so. After all, there is no architecture of truth; it is not conceived or framed. Indeed, our thinking comes from chaos and randomness. Our thinking itself from that idea is randomness and could fool us without us realizing it. Yet few hold this view. We believe that our thinking is valid. This seems to me to be a first step to the knowability of truth.
