How is truth different than fact?

No, we can’t all agree. A fact is a universally agreed upon theory, such as 2+2=4, something that is more likely able to be proven using science/math. Facts can be altered as we discover new things. Truth, is an individual perception of facts and how we come by facts. Religion is truth for many people, yet not every religion can be fact.

Facts are ideas that are supported by truths.
Fact: This book is red…
Truth: ...because it absorbs every other colour besides red.

What is a fact or a truth to a woman is not always the facts or the truth to a man.

@chyna: what does gender have to do with it?

A statement can be of a factual type without being true. That’s the first thing. A statement of a factual type is objectively verifiable. When put to the test, it may not be proved true. Until then, it is testable, and some may regard it as a fact. These beliefs were treated as facts in their time:

The earth is flat.
The sun revolves around the earth.
Space is filled with a substance called aether.

Not to mention all kinds of beliefs we now call superstitions, ranging from special properties of various plants to cosmic signs and omens and animal harbingers of death.

Many of the things we think of as “facts” now have not yet been disproved but will be at some future time. No, I don’t know which ones they are.

A valid and objectively verified proposition is generally regarded as “true” in the common sense. In this sense, it is true that iron rusts and that water flows downhill, that the accused is innocent when exonerated by the evidence, and that the train leaves Union Station every day at 2:10.

There are subjectively held truths that cannot be tested, cannot be proved, and cannot be disproved. Those cannot possibly be treated as facts.

You have it backwards…..All truths are facts but not all facts are truths. Truth is a fact that has been verified. Facts are things that actually exist. I can agree with this because humans are not always capable of proving facts.

@critter: Truths are facts? So if I say that Allah is in no way, shape, or form a God and Muhammed was not his messenger, that is true for me but very very false to thousands of people.

No it is not a truth to you. Certainly you can believe that Allah is not a God which would be considered faith or a belief. Can you prove that Allah is not a God? No you cannot. Can you prove that he is a God? No you cannot. Truths are things that can be proven to be FACT. Facts are things which happen to be true that cannot necessarily be proven.

Wrong.

Facts are proven. Truths are beliefs.

Wrong. Truths have nothing to do with someones particular belief.

You all are confusing me…..

Q: What’s the difference between an orange and a tangerine?
A: A T-shirt, because motorcycles don’t have doors.

Valid question. Factual answers, but not true because they are irrelevant to the question. Facts are only true if they are relevant.

@cdwccrn, you might also want to bear in mind that all mathematical equations are tautologies (they are just statements that something is something else, and that is purely a matter of how we define things). They don’t actually contain any other information. For that reason, mathematical statements are in a class by themselves and don’t have anything to do with what we usually mean when we speak of “fact” and “truth.”

A fact cannot be interpreted.

But how can truths be interpreted?

@jeruba: wow. Are you a philosopher or something? Don’t follow alot of what you say but maybe I’m just tired.

EDIT: Wow, I got all turned around on this question, and got all confused with another one. i strike myself from the record.

And yes, truthiness is win.

@asmonet: isn’t that similar to what I said?

asmonet I disagree. Saying I believe in God is a belief hence the word believe. A belief is confidence in the proof but is not definitely true. People who believe in God have faith in Him. Truth comes from the word true, something that can be proven not false. Saying that truth is an opinion negates the idea that true is the opposite of false. Do you believe that true is the opposite of false?

LOL – Truthy? Did you get that from Colbert?

I didn’t mean truth was an opinion though, I meant that truth could be interpreted by different people, it’s a very broad term. I should have said “God exists.” in hindsight. Some people would call that statement true. That doesn’t make it a fact.

@critter, I’m telling you Allah is not a god. That is truth. In fact, there is no God at all. That is also truth. If you deign to argue with that why, that’s your own truths and beliefs you’re arguing.

EDIT: basically the same as what asmonet said right up there ^^^

“Things need not have happened to be true. Tales and adventures are the shadow truths that will endure when mere facts are dust and ashes and forgotten.”

@omfgTALIjustIMDu: Can you prove Allah is not God? If so, how? Your arguing beliefs not truths. If truths were simply based on what one believes and not facts, perhaps I should have argued with my teachers in college when I answered the question true but she thought it was false.

@critter: I think you’re confusing relative truth with absolute truth.

This is getting silly. :-/

@critter, Belief=truth. We live life based on what we perceive to be true.

My opinion is truth is absolute, not opinion, and that you are absolutely in error. Since this is my opinion, then you must grant that it is true according to your philosophy. :)

Not really, as I regard your opinion as flawed, so again, not really.

@critter, I do believe you’re starting to see the point. What you’ve said is true for you, and what we’ve said is true for us. Whichever is fact is impossible to know because it cannot be proven, as we’ve just demonstrated.

@omfg: I said it as a joke. By pure definition truth is something that can be proven to be true. This is what I am arguing. I think you are arguing that different perspectives bring different truths to the table. For example 70 degrees is comfortable to me but my wife is cold. So to her 70 degrees is cold but to me 70 degrees is comfortable. Both perspectives are true based on each unique perspective. Both are based on facts though.

When you argue that Allah is not God, you don’t have absolute truths to back up that argument. The beginning of life and therefore higher deity’s are based on beliefs or faiths which are principles thought to be true but incapable of presenting absolute truths.

I’m not sure anymore but I think we may be on the same page, I just disagree with your particular example.

Yep. Same page ish..

@critter, In that case we just went back 10 yards. Your definition of truth is off. I (and from what I can see, most others on this thread) define truth as something only an individual can define for himself. Therefore, to use your example, I say it’s true that 70 degrees is comfortable, but then your wife comes along and tells me that’s bulls*** and that the truth is that 70 degrees is friggin cold. It’s a matter of individual perception. There is no absolute truth because it differs for each and every single person.

@omfg: Why the hell are you hanging out with my wife?

@critter, your 70 degrees example doesn’t hold water, because if your heat is out for several days in the dead of winter, and then comes back on, then your wife will be quite warm at 70 degrees. That would get back to facts only being true if they are relative.

@alfreda: That was an example of relative truth?

@critter, Why not? She’s cool.

Alright just as long as your hanging out. :)

Think of it this way.

Lie detectors measure truth, not facts. If the person being tested believes what they’re saying, they pass the test. What they’re saying may not be a fact… but they think it is, so it is true. Truth is relative; facts are not.

@MacBean, Well put my friend, well put.

In that it really is stranger than fact.

@MacBean, they measure belief, just as you say. Not truth. Many a person has believed something untrue. The world is full of true believers who hold incompatible certainties. I think the likeliest case is that none of those is true. Why? Because I think whatever is capital-T Truth is going to be too big for our little, relative-thinking brains. And so it doesn’t matter.

But for purposes of guilt or innocence, testimony, evidence, etc., truth in a judicial context, the kind of thing that lie detectors are used for, what we’re looking for is consistency of affirmation with sensory perception. Fact, in other words. Something that can be objectively seen and verified. Not eternal verities and not inner conviction. A witness’s inner conviction of the guilt of the accused cannot be a basis for a verdict. There has to be evidence that others can independently confirm.

@Jeruba, Belief in something makes it true for the person.

No Fact can be determined from any one individual because everything that is said by one person might be True to them, but the complete opposite True for someone else. In the judicial system, for example, there is hardly and Fact behind testimonies because what each person reports seeing, assuming they’re telling the “truth,” is True to them, yet these stories can be completely conflicting.

@Macbean good point but there are ways to beat that system. Lie detectors don’t measure truth. Lie detectors measure a persons heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate, and electro-dermal activity. It doesn’t determine what a person says as true or false it attempts to detect changes in the body which typically detect lying.

The problem with saying truth is relative is that not everything is relative. For example my brothers legal name is Jason. That is the truth no matter who says it. My prior example of temperature and being cold happens to be a relative truth. Saying that truth is always relative is not a fact, because truth in some cases is absolute. If you feel that my brothers name is Steven you hold that to be true in your mind, but it is not the absolute truth. In saying that truth is relative, means that every possible situation can be positive and negative, true and false, right and wrong. Just because somebody believes something to be true does not make it true. People are often wrong in their belief or rationality.

@omfg: so anything, anything at all, can be true, if someone believes it?

I believe the Cubs will go all the way this year, then! ;)

@laureth, Well, that’s your own truth. Beliefs are truths. Truth is not relative to situations (though often it is), but more that it is defined by the individual, so truth is different for each and every person.

@critter—It is a fact that your brother’s name is Jason. If I feel that his name is Steven, that is my truth. Truth can be wrong. Fact can’t. Obviously, you disagree with this. That’s because our truths aren’t compatible and there is no fact here.

@MacBean: So you disagree with the english dictionary, which states that truth is 1. a verified indisputable fact, 2. conformity with fact, 3. accuracy, 4. a statement proven or accepted to be true, 5. reality, actuality, etc.?

@critter—Yup. I agree that truth can be a fact. I disagree that it has to be. As someone who believes firmly in the fluidity of language, I prefer to think for myself instead of adhering to “strict rules” that could change next year.

So, a truth could be something that’s factual, or it could be something that’s false. It could be something you believe in very much, or it could be something you don’t believe in at all. One thing for sure is that it doesn’t necessarily have any relation to things which are, ironically, true.

Why bother having a word at all, if it could mean anything you want it to mean? I always thought that the reason we had words was because we generally agreed on the meanings of many, many words, and thus they were very useful for communication. This reasoning breaks down when people go making up their own definitions.

There are nuances of meaning. Without them, we’d be speaking like they do in Orwell’s 1984. That would be doubleplusungood, in my opinion.

I honestly have to say that I have never met anyone that disagreed with the english dictionary. Imagine if everyone disagreed with the meaninsg of words. You would get a ridiculous language perhaps comparable to ebonics. The only reason the english language works is because people adhere to the accepted meanings.

Thank you all for struggling with this question. Stay tuned for part two.

@critter, Have you ever noticed that there are thousands of english dictionaries in print? Ever wondered why?

I always just assumed because it was a commodity.

I still have yet to find a definition in any dictionary, the few that I have checked which define truth as in the eyes of the beholder or relative. Omfg, do you have an example?

It’s not just because it’s a commodity. It’s because there are different styles with different rules and not every linguist agrees on every word origin. Check out some podcasts like Grammar Girl and Podictionary if you’re interested in finding out more.

What MacBean said.