Is something important because it is true or because of the implications or consequences of it being true?
=AphroditeGoneAwry;1833495 It stands alone. .
agreed (classic Te answer btw)I believe the implications and consequences are more important than the fact in itself. An individual who lies to impress will not be an issue with me if it does not directly effect significantly within life. I take thought to choosing to believe and go with the lie if the person is generally good spirited. Always fun to hear the stories about a person running through a jungle and tackling 10 alligators before a helicopter picks him up as he was about to bring down a tiger. Lies demeaning upon others or selfish to the manifest desires of the individual are a bit more troubling. Not pleasant with how it more directly influences rapport, choices and situations.
Is something important because it is true or because of the implications or consequences of it being true?
Is something important because it is true or because of the implications or consequences of it being true?
[MENTION=6336]AphroditeGoneAwry[/MENTION] I suppose I can't objectively say most people only focus on the consequences, since it depends on the circumstances; however, when the situation revolves around an individual who partakes in something that is morally unacceptable, it is the gut reaction of most to ignore what lead to those actions and to tunnel-vision on the consequences.
I can't seem to imagine a scenario where the subjective truth of one individual completely undermines reality. It can influence action, but it can't change the past and the arrangement of all things up to this point.
The implications or consequences are more -- well, consequential -- but will be different if they stem from something untrue. As a crude analogy: which is more important, the fact that I have edible food in my house, or the consequence of being able to use it to satisfy my hunger and feed me for the day? If the first part of the statement is not true (item is not food, or food is inedible), then the stated consequence cannot come to pass. So, the one implies or determines the other.Is something important because it is true or because of the implications or consequences of it being true?
The stick may NOT in fact be bent, but the image IS, due to the difference in refractive index between water and air. Thus both statements are true, though we must apply each to its proper subject. Much "untruth" comes from confusion as to what we are really looking at.And I was just reading about an example today because another forum member mentioned Descartes' Meditations....and Descartes gave the example of a stick in water appears bent when it is, in fact, straight, etc. Reality can seem real, and therefore true, but we can be fooled by it, enough that I think reality is not necessarily a good marker for Truth.
I see Truth as a 'primary substance' if you will, that which comes before everything else.
The implication or consequences of Truth [or Untruth] are secondary attributes, and relative to certain circumstances.
The truth is not relative to anything else. It stands alone. Therefore it is more important.
Much "untruth" comes from confusion as to what we are really looking at.