Are some things more true than others, or is everything equally untrue?

[VoidJumper]

I have landed on this question: Are some things more true than others, or is everything equally untrue?

 

Example. On the one hand is an islamic terrorist and on the other we have ordinary Joe. The question is, is one worldview more true then the other?

 

One thing can only be more or less true in relation to specific something else. For example, we can decide that we want to live in a peaceful society and in relation to that goal, it is more true that it is wrong to blow up innocent people.

But that is just an artificial goal. Who is to say that the world indeed should be peaceful? I don’t know what the world should be like, do you? I have my personal preferences of how I would want the world to be like, but the world don’t care. We can create an artificial context (e.g. society) dedicated to a certain goal. All well and good, but ain’t nothing true about it.

 

Here is an outrageous statement: The beliefs of the islamic terrorist are no more or less (un)true, than the ones of anyone else.

Damn peculiar.

[Moksha]

Enlightenment correlates with truth, until it becomes it.

[Jannes]

Absolutely speaking every "untruth" is equally true. Because direct experience is absolute truth. If the islamic terrorist of your example thinks that it is right to do a terrorist act then that is his experience. It's true that he experiences that "untruth" as truth. 

Relatively speaking of course some things are more true than others. It depends from the stage of development where the action comes from. Development means integrating more of reality. The more developed you are the more holistic your care and love will be for the world. You wouldn't scam, steal, cheat etc. because your love is to broad. Your love would need to be restricted to yourself to do that. 

[Inliytened1]

52 minutes ago, VoidJumper said:

I have landed on this question: Are some things more true than others, or is everything equally untrue?

 

Example. On the one hand is an islamic terrorist and on the other we have ordinary Joe. The question is, is one worldview more true then the other?

 

One thing can only be more or less true in relation to specific something else. For example, we can decide that we want to live in a peaceful society and in relation to that goal, it is more true that it is wrong to blow up innocent people.

But that is just an artificial goal. Who is to say that the world indeed should be peaceful? I don’t know what the world should be like, do you? I have my personal preferences of how I would want the world to be like, but the world don’t care. We can create an artificial context (e.g. society) dedicated to a certain goal. All well and good, but ain’t nothing true about it.

 

Here is an outrageous statement: The beliefs of the islamic terrorist are no more or less (un)true, than the ones of anyone else.

Damn peculiar.

Watch the episodes on Relativism.  Also check out what is Truth.