Are you a truth seeker or a partisan?

[Moonbeam]

Suppose there were a place where one could check the truth of what one believes, say whether to raise taxes on the rich would be good or bad for the country, as one of an near infinite number of examples, the subject matter of which isn't a part of what I wish to discuss, but merely an example. Each party differs rather fundamentally on what they believe and support. If, by means, let's just call it magic, we could know the truth of what we believe, would you change what you believe, or cling to it regardless because of party allegiance or stubbornness that no mater what some supposed object entity might say, you know you can't be wrong?

 

[Thebobo]

I am a parrot.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

I like pie

 

[LunarRay]

hmmmmm

Maybe I can back into an answer to the proposition you provide.

IF I take a position on an issue... any issue and come to that position based on my assessment of the data which then produced the information independent of any outside input I'd have before me the truth as I see it. I may augment at that point from other sources but with strict scrutiny. My truth, therefore, evolves but it is always started with some intuitive notion of what that probably is.
I don't see how anyone can hold on to a position in a steadfast manner in the face of contradictory or inconsistent data.
It seems the only way to arrive at truth or rather, the probability that some proposition is truth is to develop a hypothesis and go about trying to falsify as well as prove.
IF there is absence of empirically derived truth you are left with some faith based belief that something is true or false...
I am not satisfied that anything faith based has merit when there exists a high probability or even plausibility for some proposition to be true based on a non faith approach to the question.

 

[spittledip]

If I had access to some "magical" thing that everyone knew contained all truth beyond a shadow of a doubt, then of course I would believe whatever it said was true.

Of course, would it just provide a "yes" or "no" answer, or would it provide details? Some things are not black and white like the examples you provided. You can argue both sides of the example you provided (raise taxes on rich) b/c the issue is never as simple as just one thing happening. Would this magical thing have access to the future and see what the real outcome of things would be? You must understand that some people argue based on what they believe to be true and others just argue based on party politics... this being the case, some people really believe that what they hold to is what is best for the country and conflict with others who sincerely believe in the opposite thing and believe they know what is best for the country as well. Without an ability to see into the future, we really don't know what the best course of action is. The best answer might actually have worse results just due to other factors that come into play.. so without access to the future, we don't know what the best course of action is.

Of course, if the thing could see into the future, the answer might always be, "You are all screwed."

 

[LunarRay]

If I had access to some "magical" thing that everyone knew contained all truth beyond a shadow of a doubt, then of course I would believe whatever it said was true.

Of course, would it just provide a "yes" or "no" answer, or would it provide details? Some things are not black and white like the examples you provided. You can argue both sides of the example you provided (raise taxes on rich) b/c the issue is never as simple as just one thing happening. Would this magical thing have access to the future and see what the real outcome of things would be? You must understand that some people argue based on what they believe to be true and others just argue based on party politics... this being the case, some people really believe that what they hold to is what is best for the country and conflict with others who sincerely believe in the opposite thing and believe they know what is best for the country as well. Without an ability to see into the future, we really don't know what the best course of action is. The best answer might actually have worse results just due to other factors that come into play.. so without access to the future, we don't know what the best course of action is.

Of course, if the thing could see into the future, the answer might always be, "You are all screwed."

Applied versus Theoretical....

The data... any data is not futuristic... one can extrapolate from a point but folks tend to assemble historic examples when the dynamics render that approach problematic.

There is implied, ... well... perhaps it is explicit... by the Moonie question the notion, I think, that even with a magic thingi would we stand firmly with our belief regardless of its viability.
My response to that is simply... How stuff affects me is how I usually vote.... It don't much matter if it is true that an action would help the nation in general... what does it do to me is the question for me...

There are grenades strew all about with the pins pulled and I'm not about to jump on one or another even when my vote may not do anything... Peace of mind and being true to myself is my objective.


Maybe!!

 

[MrPickins]

In all seriousness, people who strictly follow party lines without critical thought are a danger to our country.

 

[Greenman]

Anyone who wouldn't abandon their beliefs in the face of cretin knowledge is a fool. With that said, it would also depend on what the criteria are for achieving a particular outcome. As an example, the solution to most of the worlds problems at the present time is education and murder. Killing two thirds of the population would effectively solve most of the major issues confronting us. I still prefer the education route.

 

[trenchfoot]

I like the truth served up neat, maybe sometimes with that little umbrella in it or even garnished with an suspiciously vague opinion or two just to make things interesting.

I like the truth whether it's good, bad or indifferent. Too bad our politicians want to lie, obfuscate, redirect, deflect, embellish and lace their words with deceptive abandon in order to entice us to vote for their self-serving prostituted asses.

 

[MagickMan]

I like pie

+1, for sure

 

[Londo_Jowo]

+1, for sure

The real questions are:
Pumpkin or Sweet potato?
Boston Creme or Coconut Creme?

 

[Moonbeam]

Anyone who wouldn't abandon their beliefs in the face of cretin knowledge is a fool. With that said, it would also depend on what the criteria are for achieving a particular outcome. As an example, the solution to most of the worlds problems at the present time is education and murder. Killing two thirds of the population would effectively solve most of the major issues confronting us. I still prefer the education route.

I'm assuming certain knowledge there. It seems to me that it's a rather common phenomenon that people persist in thinking patterns that result in repeated failure. My conclusion is that while people may say they are logical and think they are, and believe that being logical is a good thing, in practice we prove to be a lot more irrational at times than logical. Of course, I can't stack that up against some magical source to check it for accuracy.

 

[Moonbeam]

Applied versus Theoretical....

The data... any data is not futuristic... one can extrapolate from a point but folks tend to assemble historic examples when the dynamics render that approach problematic.

There is implied, ... well... perhaps it is explicit... by the Moonie question the notion, I think, that even with a magic thingi would we stand firmly with our belief regardless of its viability.
My response to that is simply... How stuff affects me is how I usually vote.... It don't much matter if it is true that an action would help the nation in general... what does it do to me is the question for me...

There are grenades strew all about with the pins pulled and I'm not about to jump on one or another even when my vote may not do anything... Peace of mind and being true to myself is my objective.


Maybe!!

I have a hunch that being true to yourself may actually mean putting yourself last. I don't know how the last will be first, otherwise.

 

[LunarRay]

I have a hunch that being true to yourself may actually mean putting yourself last. I don't know how the last will be first, otherwise.

Not sure either... but by analogy I'd offer; the last one on the bus probably will be the first one off.

But, after thinking about the proposition you provided initially as OP, I can't find a real situation to examine. I have to move to the rather absurd method forced by those who proclaim the genie told them what was right and sure enough it was or is exactly what they believe. But that too simply seems to justify the passionate attraction to some group of like thinkers. Each of who embellish the genie talent for truth giving. Soon they'll have erected a new God... The God of truth cuz he said he was.

The last sentence of your OP contains a key... "Regardless, you can't be wrong.... " You must always search for what might be the truth in places other than the ends .... it is in some third place.

 

[spittledip]

Applied versus Theoretical....

The data... any data is not futuristic... one can extrapolate from a point but folks tend to assemble historic examples when the dynamics render that approach problematic.

There is implied, ... well... perhaps it is explicit... by the Moonie question the notion, I think, that even with a magic thingi would we stand firmly with our belief regardless of its viability.
My response to that is simply... How stuff affects me is how I usually vote.... It don't much matter if it is true that an action would help the nation in general... what does it do to me is the question for me...

There are grenades strew all about with the pins pulled and I'm not about to jump on one or another even when my vote may not do anything... Peace of mind and being true to myself is my objective.


Maybe!!

I think my problem is that I have trouble accepting the whole notion even though it is just pretend b/c there might not be a right answer which is why I was wondering about seeing the results... so I am just circling. Although my answer already was that I would take the truth no matter what according to this scenario. One would be insane not to.

 

[Zaap]

The real questions are:
Pumpkin or Sweet potato?
Boston Creme or Coconut Creme?

No key lime option?

I'm all about the key lime.

 

[cubby1223]

Unless you are paid to promote a party, I can't see people making the choice to be partisan.

Over the years I have come to the conclusion that truth is subjective. It is impossible to know if the truth is true. Best we can do is put a percentage on how likely we believe what the truth is, actually is the truth.

The reason why there are multiple sets of beliefs isn't always because people are being manipulated and lied to - it's because there are indeed multiple ways to present a logical, plausible scenarios. To believe something to be true then requires, in a sense, a leap of faith to fill in the missing data and reach a conclusion.

In the end, truth is marred by so much uncertainty that we must take shortcuts in order to move forward with our lives. While most people want to seek truth, reality is it is better to seek comfort. Do I want to spend the rest of this weekend seeking out truth in the abortion debate, or seek truth in the recent Obamacare claims by citizens? Did Brutus really kill Caesar? Or would I prefer to meet up with family and friends tomorrow and enjoy the day just hanging out? To me the latter is the better choice.

 

[runzwithsizorz]

"It is curious how often you humans manage to obtain that which you do not want"
Mr. Spock, Star Trek: Errand of mercy

 

[AdamantC]

I like pudding

FTFY

 

[LunarRay]

I think my problem is that I have trouble accepting the whole notion even though it is just pretend b/c there might not be a right answer which is why I was wondering about seeing the results... so I am just circling. Although my answer already was that I would take the truth no matter what according to this scenario. One would be insane not to.

My experience indicates:

In politics there are so many planks in the platform that one side pretends is their philosophy one cannot find either side contains all that one accepts as being the right way to operate if they actually are looking at which side they ought to align with. So they choose the lesser of two evils... so to speak.

A partisan tends not to see the forest for the tree. They identify with an ideology that may be filled with false representations. Or they are more or less single issue folks and are biased in that direction at the expense of what ever else may be at play. They tend to defend the weaker aspects their political choice at the expense of the truth.

We are talking about folks with the power to set agenda which is never articulated into the planks of their platform. I figure that is truth.... I'm such a small bit of the program that I don't matter to either side... but, 200 million of me do... I am manipulated by every possible method to induce me to favor their side... both sides play that game.

Moonster asks do we seek truth and the answer has to be that we don't know what the truth is even if it smacks us in the face. Some genie will tell us we are right but I don't trust that either. I deal in probabilities not certainties... I know of nothing certain. I'll not even know that I died when I do.

So... again I say... Truth is what I intuit it to be. I'll bring into the picture empirical probability and that will inform my intuition and that becomes my truth. Everything seems to be like bb shot all coming at me and I'm able to deal with one bb at a time... I'm forced to side with the general theme of one side or the other... Any attempt to do otherwise is futile. I think.

 

[Moonbeam]

My experience indicates:

In politics there are so many planks in the platform that one side pretends is their philosophy one cannot find either side contains all that one accepts as being the right way to operate if they actually are looking at which side they ought to align with. So they choose the lesser of two evils... so to speak.

A partisan tends not to see the forest for the tree. They identify with an ideology that may be filled with false representations. Or they are more or less single issue folks and are biased in that direction at the expense of what ever else may be at play. They tend to defend the weaker aspects their political choice at the expense of the truth.

We are talking about folks with the power to set agenda which is never articulated into the planks of their platform. I figure that is truth.... I'm such a small bit of the program that I don't matter to either side... but, 200 million of me do... I am manipulated by every possible method to induce me to favor their side... both sides play that game.

Moonster asks do we seek truth and the answer has to be that we don't know what the truth is even if it smacks us in the face. Some genie will tell us we are right but I don't trust that either. I deal in probabilities not certainties... I know of nothing certain. I'll not even know that I died when I do.

So... again I say... Truth is what I intuit it to be. I'll bring into the picture empirical probability and that will inform my intuition and that becomes my truth. Everything seems to be like bb shot all coming at me and I'm able to deal with one bb at a time... I'm forced to side with the general theme of one side or the other... Any attempt to do otherwise is futile. I think.

Would you still think anyway if some magical truth machine told you it was wrong? Maybe you are that truth machine, on the other hand.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Would you still think anyway if some magical truth machine told you it was wrong? Maybe you are that truth machine, on the other hand.

How would I know if I was telling myself the truth?

 

[Londo_Jowo]

The truth is in the pudding!

 

[MagickMan]

The real questions are:
Pumpkin or Sweet potato?
Boston Creme or Coconut Creme?

Gotta go Boston creme, but then there's the eternal question, is it really pie or is it cake?

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Gotta go Boston creme, but then there's the eternal question, is it really pie or is it cake?

It's quite the political issue as the pie eaters consider it a pie whereas the cake eaters consider it a cake. Whilst the moderate and independents could care less and eat it without question.