Philosophy Forum

Read Topic
Reply

The honest truth and the factual truth

Philosophy Forum
» General Discussion
» The honest truth and the factual truth

Get Email Updates • Email this Topic • Print this Page

Lately I have become aware that most of my questions about "truth" are really related to questions about the honest truth rather than the factual truth. They are questions like: should I share "the truth" or keep it secret? and is it okay to lie to others in various situations? and also do I have the right to demand "the truth" from others? "Truth" in this context is different from the "truth" of the logical truth table or the "truth" of hard science.

Interestingly, the word "lies" only applies to the honest truth context. The word "false" can be used in either.

There is definitely a difference but I am having difficulty articulating it. I am interested in how other people will describe this difference.

I think it is primarily a grammatical difference so maybe one of the analytics among us can provide some elegant statements of the difference between factual truth and honest truth.

@Deckard,

Deckard;111017 wrote:

Lately I have become aware that most of my questions about "truth" are really related to questions about the honest truth rather than the factual truth. They are questions like: should I share "the truth" or keep it secret? and is it okay to lie to others in various situations? and also do I have the right to demand "the truth" from others? "Truth" in this context is different from the "truth" of the logical truth table or the "truth" of hard science.

Whether you should share the honest truth is indeed a tough question. I bet that most of us agree that honesty is a rule of thumb. Let's call "honest" truth a belief that is justified for you. You think someone is committing adultery, for instance. Or you think that someone is lying, in the usual senes of intentionally misrepresenting their personally justified belief. Let's say you know your son cheated on a test but that this cheating got him into a good school. Do you omit to tell the authorities? Is this a lie? Let's say you find out you are dying but you don't want to bring anyone down. You tell your daughter, who is on her honeymoon, that the doctor says you're fine, for altruistic reasons. I would say that as far as moral judgment is concerned, the details are everything. Even then, some are more puritanical about honesty than others.

A right to free speech is a right to demand the truth (You can demand it, ask for it passionately. That's pretty much it.). A right to another's truth is something else. We have to distinguish between legal rights and ideal ethical rights, I think. This too is a case by case scenario. If someone knows that the well is poisoned, and doesn't share this, it's close to murder. If someone witnesses a crime but tells police they didn't out of fear of retribution, this is something else.

I think the word "truth" is especially context-dependent as far as its meanings go. I like that you distinguished between its more popular uses.

@Deckard,

Deckard;111017 wrote:

Lately I have become aware that most of my questions about "truth" are really related to questions about the honest truth rather than the factual truth. They are questions like: should I share "the truth" or keep it secret? and is it okay to lie to others in various situations? and also do I have the right to demand "the truth" from others? "Truth" in this context is different from the "truth" of the logical truth table or the "truth" of hard science.

Interestingly, the word "lies" only applies to the honest truth context. The word "false" can be used in either.

There is definitely a difference but I am having difficulty articulating it. I am interested in how other people will describe this difference.

I think it is primarily a grammatical difference so maybe one of the analytics among us can provide some elegant statements of the difference between factual truth and honest truth.

I would, but I don't understand the difference you have in mind. Examples would help a great deal.

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;111026 wrote:

I would, but I don't understand the difference you have in mind. Examples would help a great deal.

For example,
I'm talking about the difference between these two questions:

Are you being honest?
and
Do you have scientific evidence to back up what you are saying?

Maybe I should not have called it "factual truth" but rather "justified truth". "Factual truth" sounds pretty clumsy.

Justified truth vs. Honest truth.

That helps my own understanding a lot to have changed that word.

@Deckard,

Deckard;111044 wrote:

For example,
I'm talking about the difference between these two questions:

Are you being honest?
and
Do you have scientific evidence to back up what you are saying?

Maybe I should not have called it "factual truth" but rather "justified truth". "Factual truth" sounds pretty clumsy.

Justified truth vs. Honest truth.

That helps my own understanding a lot to have changed that word.

Someone could be honest about a fact, just as someone could lie about a fact. And I'm sure many of your 'honest truths' are also 'justified truths'.

You're really going to have to give some examples demonstrating how these two are mutually exclusive (if you're trying to say they are), and further detail what sort of distinction you're trying to make. It's very, very unclear.

@Zetherin,

Zetherin;111046 wrote:

Someone could be honest about a fact, just as someone could lie about a fact. And I'm sure many of your 'honest truths' are also 'justified truths'.

You're really going to have to give some examples demonstrating how these two are mutually exclusive (if you're trying to say they are), and further detail what sort of distinction you're trying to make. It's very, very unclear.

I still don't understand honest fact or honest truth. Maybe you have in mind being truthful. That is, saying what you believe is true. But I still don't see what you are getting at.

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;111059 wrote:

I still don't understand honest fact or honest truth. Maybe you have in mind being truthful. That is, saying what you believe is true. But I still don't see what you are getting at.

I think maybe he's getting at a distinction between truths which correspond with reality (fact), as opposed to truths which are preferential (like someone loosely saying, "It's true X icecream flavor is the best").

I'm not sure, though. Hopefully he responds soon, as I'm lost as well.

@Zetherin,

Zetherin;111067 wrote:

I think maybe he's getting at a distinction between truths which correspond with reality (fact), as opposed to truths which are preferential (like someone loosely saying, "It's true X icecream flavor is the best").

I'm not sure, though. Hopefully he responds soon, as I'm lost as well.

I think that posters have an obligation to write so that readers don't have to wonder what it is they are saying. One thing people should not do is use terms they have invented, and then give no explanation of what they mean. Like, "honest truth". If you make up a term, then you should explain what the term means.

@kennethamy,

Maybe this will help.

It is possible to imagine that "honest truth" and "justified truth" are synonymous terms. For example if we anthropomorphasize the world then we can construct the following conflation of the honest and the justified:

[Provided the world is honest with us, our beliefs about that world are justified. But sometimes the world lies to us and in these cases the beliefs are not justified.

We could also imagine that our senses are honest or dishonest with us.]

Otherwise what I am calling a justified or factual truth is not synonymous with an honest truth.

(Feeling your hate kennethamy and it is hilarious.. Keep it coming.)

Here's the example again. I added the word "types"

I'm talking about the difference between these two types of questions:

Are you being honest?
and
Do you have scientific evidence to back up what you are saying?

@Deckard,

Deckard;111082 wrote:

Maybe this will help.

It is possible to imagine that "honest truth" and "justified truth" are synonymous terms. For example if we anthropomorphasize the world then we can construct the following conflation of the honest and the justified:

[Provided the world is honest with us, our beliefs about that world are justified. But sometimes the world lies to us and in these cases the beliefs are not justified.

We could also imagine that our senses are honest or dishonest with us.]

Otherwise what I am calling a justified or factual truth is not synonymous with an honest truth.

(Feeling your hate kennethamy and it is hilarious.. Keep it coming.)

What hate is that? Why not just define "honest truth" for us. I suppose that "justified truth" is only, truth that is justified.Am I wrong? And it really would help if you could give us at least one example of honest truth, and even, maybe, one example of justified truth, so we can find out that we agree. An example of a justified truth is that Mars is the fourth planet. Isn't that right? That Mars is the fourth planet is justified, and it is also true. So that Mars is the fourth planet is a justified truth. Do you agree. If you agree, then all you have to do is to give us an example of an honest truth. Then, if we agree, then you can go ahead and say whatever you like about justified truth and honest truth. Sound like a plan?

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;111086 wrote:

What hate is that? Why not just define "honest truth" for us. I suppose that "justified truth" is only, truth that is justified.Am I wrong? And it really would help if you could give us at least one example of honest truth, and even, maybe, one example of justified truth, so we can find out that we agree. An example of a justified truth is that Mars is the fourth planet. Isn't that right? That Mars is the fourth planet is justified, and it is also true. So that Mars is the fourth planet is a justified truth. Do you agree. If you agree, then all you have to do is to give us an example of an honest truth. Then, if we agree, then you can go ahead and say whatever you like about justified truth and honest truth. Sound like a plan?

OK,
justified truth: Mars is the 4th planet (its justified because we have scientific evidence)
honest truth: Mars is the 4th planet (instead of lying and saying its the 3rd 5th 6th etc. planet)

@Deckard,

Deckard;111089 wrote:

OK,
justified truth: Mars is the 4th planet (its justified because we have scientific evidence)
honest truth: Mars is the 4th planet (instead of lying and saying its the 3rd 5th 6th etc. planet)

Fine. Honest truth = stating what you believe to be true. Justified truth= a truth that is justified. (Too bad it took so long to get here)

Now, having made that distinction, now what?

@kennethamy,

Oh that's all. You can go now.

@Deckard,

Deckard;111095 wrote:

Oh that's all. You can go now.

Oh, I thought you had a purpose in making that distinction. I guess not. It seems to me a lot of time was spent over nothing. Doesn't it seem so to you?

@kennethamy,

Defining terms and making such distinctions is valuable in itself. It makes subsequent statements more clear.

We've defined two different kinds of truth. So the next time I'm thinking/talking/forumming about "truth" I'll ask myself: Am I talking about the type of truth that we called "honest" or the type of truth that we called "justified" or "factual"?

@Deckard,

Deckard;111105 wrote:

Defining terms and making such distinctions is valuable in itself. It makes subsequent statements more clear.

We've defined two different kinds of truth. So the next time I'm thinking/talking/forumming about "truth" I'll ask myself: Am I talking about the type of truth that we called "honest" or the type of truth that we called "justified" or "factual"?

Those aren't two different kinds of truth. The difference is between the truth being told by someone who believes it is true, and the same truth that is justified. So why would there be two different kinds of truth. If I eat something with a fork, or if I eat it with a spoon, it doesn't make any difference to what I eat, does it? Truth is truth, whether you believe it, or whether it is justified. Well, if you happen to say anything more about this, we'll see whether the distinction is useful or not.

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;111109 wrote:

Those aren't two different kinds of truth. The difference is between the truth being told by someone who believes it is true, and the same truth that is justified. So why would there be two different kinds of truth. If I eat something with a fork, or if I eat it with a spoon, it doesn't make any difference to what I eat, does it? Truth is truth, whether you believe it, or whether it is justified. Well, if you happen to say anything more about this, we'll see whether the distinction is useful or not.

Two definitions of truth?
Dictionary makes the same distinction. I suppose I could have started there.
Still I don't think the dictionary gets to the bottom of it. And I don't think we've really nailed it down yet on this thread.

How about another question:

Suppose we discovered a planet between Earth and Mars.
Then it would no longer justifiably true that Mars was the 4th planet.

When we said that Mars was the 4th planet before we knew about the planet between Earth and Mars were we lying?

@Deckard,

Deckard;111120 wrote:

Two definitions of truth?
Dictionary makes the same distinction. I suppose I could have started there.
Still I don't think the dictionary gets to the bottom of it. And I don't think we've really nailed it down yet on this thread.

How about another question:

Why don't we call the opposite of a justified truth a lie?

What distinction does the dictionary make? Between "honest truth" and "justified truth". What dictionary? I don't believe it.

Because it wouldn't be a lie. It would just be an unjustified truth. It was true in the Middle Ages that there were germs. But it was an unjustified truth. But no one lied about it. No one even knew about it. A lucky guess is an unjustified truth. But why would it be a lie?

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;111123 wrote:

What distinction does the dictionary make? Between "honest truth" and "justified truth". What dictionary? I don't believe it.

Because it wouldn't be a lie. It would just be an unjustified truth. It was true in the Middle Ages that there were germs. But it was an unjustified truth. But no one lied about it. No one even knew about it. A lucky guess is an unjustified truth. But why would it be a lie?

Suppose we were conducting a test. Suppose in the grading process we are able to tell not only whether the question is right or wrong but also if the subject lied or told the truth when he/she answered.

For each question the subject can:

get the question right (True)
get the question wrong (False)
answer dishonestly (Lie)
answer honestly (Honest)

How would the test be evaluated? What would that grade mean?
Picture the results of various populations plotted on a Cartesian Plane.

There is only one kind of truth. However, truth is two dimensional, at least when observed in subjects that are capable of lying.

:bigsmile:

@Deckard,

Deckard;111017 wrote:

Lately I have become aware that most of my questions about "truth" are really related to questions about the honest truth rather than the factual truth. They are questions like: should I share "the truth" or keep it secret? and is it okay to lie to others in various situations? and also do I have the right to demand "the truth" from others? "Truth" in this context is different from the "truth" of the logical truth table or the "truth" of hard science.

I found this clear to begin with.

Philosophy Forum
» General Discussion
» The honest truth and the factual truth

Read Topic
Reply

Philosophy Forum

The honest truth and the factual truth

Quick Links

My Account

able2know