• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Is everything we read up for interpretation?

John Liberty

John Liberty

Banned
Joined
Jun 30, 2013
Messages
275
Reaction score
72
Location
Ask the NSA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Do we see different articles and books through different eyes. Is the book/article different for everyone or does everyone read the exact same thing and understand it like everyone else? Is the constitution up for interpretation? How do we know we are interpreting the constitution as it was meant to be interpreted? Are we interpreting the bible correctly? What is truth? Is there absolute truth that exists in "reality" or is the truth only what we believe is the truth?

I had this discussion with a very good friend of mine last night on IM and I found it to be very intellectually stimulating and actually quite fun. I love having philosophical debates because no one is "right" or "wrong" it's all based on our opinions and what we believe.

I'd like us to start out with me saying that I think the truth is only what we believe to be the truth? Truth is not a physical object that we can hold or feel...it exists inside our minds and is thus created by our minds. I would like to go as far as to say that perhaps even reality is in our minds. We get sight, feeling, and smell from our minds...is it so crazy to believe that at some level it is created from our mind? If everyone thinks rocks are always blue, are rocks always blue? Is there a reality outside our own minds, or is reality what our minds make it?

I hope to see some good replies!
 
John Liberty said:
Do we see different articles and books through different eyes. Is the book/article different for everyone or does everyone read the exact same thing and understand it like everyone else? Is the constitution up for interpretation? How do we know we are interpreting the constitution as it was meant to be interpreted? Are we interpreting the bible correctly? What is truth? Is there absolute truth that exists in "reality" or is the truth only what we believe is the truth?

I had this discussion with a very good friend of mine last night on IM and I found it to be very intellectually stimulating and actually quite fun. I love having philosophical debates because no one is "right" or "wrong" it's all based on our opinions and what we believe.

I'd like us to start out with me saying that I think the truth is only what we believe to be the truth? Truth is not a physical object that we can hold or feel...it exists inside our minds and is thus created by our minds. I would like to go as far as to say that perhaps even reality is in our minds. We get sight, feeling, and smell from our minds...is it so crazy to believe that at some level it is created from our mind? If everyone thinks rocks are always blue, are rocks always blue? Is there a reality outside our own minds, or is reality what our minds make it?

I hope to see some good replies!
Click to expand...

Most everything we read, hear and see is processed through our own filters.
 
Communication occurs through meaning attachment on symbols. Where by symbols all verbal and non-verbal symbols are included. The written belongs the the verbal part of communication, and that too is not exempt from attaching a meaning to the symbols in written form (though there might be non-verbal communication in written also).

Just what sort of a meaning one choose to attach among many other alternatives has to do with perception. Perception zooms in into some parts of the symbols and filters others and this is done in a specific genuine way usually.

In short: Yes. Everything is up for interpretation because no symbol (including these written here) can ever enter our minds without prior perceptive filtering.
 
DDD said:
Communication occurs through meaning attachment on symbols. Where by symbols all verbal and non-verbal symbols are included. The written belongs the the verbal part of communication, and that too is not exempt from attaching a meaning to the symbols in written form (though there might be non-verbal communication in written also).

Just what sort of a meaning one choose to attach among many other alternatives has to do with perception. Perception zooms in into some parts of the symbols and filters others and this is done in a specific genuine way usually.

In short: Yes. Everything is up for interpretation because no symbol (including these written here) can ever enter our minds without prior perceptive filtering.
Click to expand...

Well said. :)
 
John Liberty said:
Do we see different articles and books through different eyes. Is the book/article different for everyone or does everyone read the exact same thing and understand it like everyone else? Is the constitution up for interpretation? How do we know we are interpreting the constitution as it was meant to be interpreted? Are we interpreting the bible correctly? What is truth? Is there absolute truth that exists in "reality" or is the truth only what we believe is the truth?
Click to expand...
Archaeology Science is the search for fact... not truth. If it's truth you're looking for, Dr. Tyree's philosophy class is right down the hall.
-Indiana Jones (slightly edited)

At least we're in the right section! ;)


Given the distinction above, truth is an illusion as are most things that we perceive. Our continuous field of vision is an illusion created after-the-fact in our brains. We don't see everything in that field with every 1/30th second snapshot our eyes take, we only see pieces of it that the brain assembles and translates based on past experience, which is different for everyone. We also know from physics that reality is much less solid than it appears but our genes dictate our senses are good enough for survival, which is all that counts. If vision, the predominant sensor most of us have, is so obviously illusionary, then how can we pretend to grasp "truth" in any objective form?
 
On the one hand I would like to quote Thoreau with his famous "Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth", on the other Heinz von Foerster with "Truth is the invention of a liar". I really like both words although there is a sharp contradiction between them. Thoreau believes in truth as something you can find, as a moment you can feel. It is possible to own it like money, fame or love. The radical constructivist von Foerster denies the existence of truth. For him it is rather a political word used in debates to frame the words of an enemy as a lie. Truth only exists in ideologies.
 
Truth is what a group of folks or an individual believes for a period of time. Facts don't change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom