Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Walter Seymour Allward's Veritas (Truth) outside Supreme Court of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario Canada. The question of what is a proper basis for deciding how words, symbols, ideas and beliefs may properly be considered true, whether by a single person or an entire society, is dealt with by the five most prevalent substantive theories of truth listed below.
Epistemology is the branch of philosophy that examines the nature, origin, and limits of knowledge.Also called theory of knowledge, it explores different types of knowledge, such as propositional knowledge about facts, practical knowledge in the form of skills, and knowledge by acquaintance as a familiarity through experience.
Truth-generating perspectives are collective and opposed to, or engaged in a struggle against, power and authority. For example, the collective perspective of the " proletariat ". So, the proposition is true if it is the "product of political struggle" for the " emancipation of the workers" ( Theodor Adorno ).
Religious views on truth vary both between and within religions. The most universal concept of religion that holds true in every case is the inseparable nature of truth and religious belief. Each religion sees itself as the only path to truth. [citation needed] Religious truth, therefore, is never relative, always absolute.
This necessity is driven by the varying, and conflicting, claims of different philosophies. The rules of logic have no ability to distinguish truth on their own. An individual must determine what standards distinguish truth from falsehood. Not all criteria are equally valid. Some standards are sufficient, while others are questionable. [1]
Epistemologists who suppose the contrary have been chasing a will-o'-the-wisp. What has really been happening is this. Different epistemologists have been emphasizing, concentrating on, "pushing" different epistemic desiderata, different features of belief that are positively valuable from the standpoint of the aims of cognition." [5]: 22
Besides factuality, natural sciences also have conventions or customs, and speculation and opinion. Consequently, some judgment and comparison of sources is needed in order to identify reliable sources. Reliable sources respect truth; a source that is commonly untruthful is not reliable. A source may be partly or more or less reliable.
Expertise, or alternatively what Emmanuel Levinas called the tyranny of opinion, [9] or else an appeal to science, [10] may be looked to for alternative sources of moral authority; or there may be a postmodern revulsion from all grand narratives which might ground such narratives [11] in favour of moral relativism.