Hey guys sorry I didn't post this sooner...
In class we talked about Montaigne and Descartes. We learned that the "essay" was created by French philosopher Montaigne.
We asked:
Which philosopher said "I think, therefore I Am"?
A Descartes
B Montaigne
C Plato
D Spinoza
Answer is A
Do you think truth is subjective or objective?
Bonus question:
If you could go back in time and confront Montaigne about creating the essay what would you do?
Picture Note: found this the other day and figured it was probably the philosophy of half the class. I know it is definitely mine.
SUBJECTIVE EVIDENCE is evidence that you cannot evaluate -- you have to simply accept what the person says or reject it.
ReplyDeleteOBJECTIVE EVIDENCE is evidence you can examine and evaluate for yourself.
http://www.godonthe.net/evidence/objctive.htm
If that definition is the case, then I think that truth can be both because some things can be examined while others can't.
And if I could talk to Montaigne I would say:
"Je ne pense pas que c'est une bonne idée monsieur" (I do not think that is a good idea sir.)
I think that the concept of truth began as subjective but has become objective. Universal truth is not a matter of perspective because it has become another gear in the clockwork of mankind. We accept, without question, that murder is bad, betrayal isn't quite nice, to live is to die, and so on. Other facets of "truth" are perspective because not every individual looks at the world the same way.
ReplyDeleteTruth is a relative concept. From the very beginning of your life, you are socialized with a particular set of beliefs and values that will likely follow you for the rest of your life based largely on what your parents teach you, where you live, what your friends' beliefs and values are, your own personal expiriences, ect. Because each experience and upbringing is different, there is simply no way one truth can be the only truth. Even the worst of social taboos are a product of subjective truth, such as slavery. Although you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone today, including myself, that would argue that slavery isn't awful and inhuman, almost every civilization on Earth practiced it at one time. It had become ingrained into cultures, and therefore very few people thought of it as being immoral, and if we had been indoctrinated from the beginning of our lives that such an act was socially acceptable, the majority of us would also believe it to be a normal and ethical practice.
ReplyDeleteBut on the other hand, especially when empirical evidence becomes involved, there are some truths that are very hard to argue with. You could argue that atomic theory is just a theory, but undeniable proof that atomic theory holds ground exists. Nuclear powerplants and bombs work right after all, don't they?
The question can get very tricky, and the difference between the two can become uncomprehendable, but when it comes down to issues of morality or faith, the only right answer is the one you believe to be correct.