"I mean correct as in....those that agree with ME!", Indyvidual and those that think like ME! None of those, pussy footed, bleeding heart commie, lefty, greenie, picko liberals progressive etc etc types, did I say pussy footed, well I say pussy footed, them as well!

Foxy, Indy wants you to fess up to which or all of the above are you, he's given up on me, I'm just a little old commie who wants to take away his aged welfare, and set him to work in a Seniors National Service chain gang! Hummmm, not a bad idea.

.

Dear Indyvidual,

.

You wrote :

« Almost everyone is capable of perceiving but only few perceive correctly ! I mean correct as in factual & not as in idealism & bias distorted perception ! »
.

Thanks for the explanation, Indyvidual.

Unfortunately, I doubt that anyone is capable of performing that fantastic prowess.

Fact, in my mind, means something that corresponds to reality. And reality is that which exists independent of ideas concerning it.

Fact is an objective notion and, unfortunately, the perceptions of human observers are inevitably subjective.

In science, fact is an observation that has been repeatedly confirmed and for all practical purposes is accepted as “true.” Truth in science, however, is never final and what is accepted as a fact today may be modified or even discarded tomorrow.

I see truth as information that has not been voluntarily deformed at the time of emission. Or should I say it is whatever version of reality, thought, ideas, qualia, dreams, or imagination a particular individual is capable of perceiving or experiencing and subsequently transmitting without voluntarily deforming it.

In this definition, truth and the object of truth (reality, thought, ideas, qualia etc…) are totally different entities. Truth is simply the absence of intent to voluntarily deform information concerning the object of truth.

That, of course, does not exclude the involuntary deformation of information concerning the object of truth. To such an extent, that the information that is emitted may be totally erroneous but perfectly truthful.

It follows that there are as many truths as there are observers and each one may be completely different from all the others, though each observer is telling the truth from his or her particular perspective, the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I see truth as a perfectly subjective notion.

.

(Continued …)

.

.

(Continued …)

.

Our initial perception may be false. We may incorrectly interpret what we perceive. Shock or prejudice may prevent us from correctly registering what we perceive. We may suffer a lapse of memory at the time of transmitting the information. We may not employ the correct expressions or be sufficiently precise in relaying the information. Our body language may be inconsistent with our oral expression, etc. All these and many other factors may possibly result in the involuntary deformation of information concerning the object of truth.

The star we claim to see may have disappeared from the heavens millions of years ago. That does not alter the fact that we are telling the truth in claiming to see it. Truth is not reality in this instance.

Truth is a horizon that keeps its distance no matter where we turn and what strategy we adopt in order to approach it.

For there to be truth, somebody must emit information. If there is nobody around to do that, there can be no truth. No human being, no truth.

.

Hi Banjo,

Is the truth of Ukraine crossing the Russian border subjective?

Another point.

Just say you had a consultation with a surgeon who lies to you about the risks and benefits of a procedure, persuading you to go ahead with it. Things go wrong and the matter ends up in court. Would you think that a court would tell you there was no case for the surgeon to answer because you agreed to the procedure? I ask this because you seem to think that Russia's autocracy is legitimate because it has popular support, yet that support is in large part due to state propaganda and outlawing opposing opinion, as was the case with other autocratic regimes like Nazi Germany.

I'm sure you don't believe in the legitimacy of public support of autocracies using propaganda and suppressing dissent, but that is the impression you give when you say that the Russian autocracy has popular support.

Hi Fester,

Autocrats like Putin will someday depart
Hopefully his replacement will have a heart
And, like Gorbachev, he shall try to reform
An authoritarian political system hard to transform

Russia's an enigma that will need to dig deep
To wake up from the slumber of its comatose sleep
It will need to shed chains embedded in fear
And admit state control is far too severe

Only then can Russia stand and proclaim
that centuries of abuse
Were not suffered in vain.

Poetry like that could get you jail time in Russia Foxy. Safe for you here fortunately. The Russian mafia is at most danger from former Soviet states undergoing democratic change. The Russian people were subjected to a propaganda campaign against Ukraine long before the invasion.