The question of the nature of truth, whether it is relative or absolute, is fundamental to our existence, and therefore deserves careful consideration. Unfortunately, debates about truth often quickly devolve into the realm of the theoretical and the metaphysical.

While the reasoned arguments in these debates might theoretically give insight into the nature of truth, I find they usually suffer one common defect: thanks to their multi-syllable words and convoluted thinking, I seldom have any idea what in hell they're talking about.

I propose a different approach.

Let's start by looking at a simple, useful, everyday question and see what it can show us about the nature of truth.

How many times when getting ready for a big occasion have you asked yourself the following question:

What is the best color to wear?

If you are an American bride, you might think that white is the best. If you were a Chinese bride, you would probably choose red. If you were going to a funeral or a formal dinner party, you might decide on black.

The truth of which color is best, then, depends on the situation. Truth obviously is relative.

But wait.

The best color is always the one appropriate to the situation and culture. The Chinese bride wearing red, the American bride in white, and the mourner in black are in agreement. They all choose colors according to this rule.

The colors may be different, but the truth is always the same. Truth, without a doubt, is absolute.

*

Sadly, we don't seem to have gotten very far. We seem to have proved that truth is obviously relative and, at the same time, without a doubt absolute.

Actually, though, we have paved the way for a major breakthrough in our understanding of truth.

To debate truth, a proper question must be posed.

*

Questions involving only opinion are not suitable subject for truth. Opinions not only vary from person to person and culture to culture, but they also change over time. I loved eating bananas when I was a child. I couldn't stand them when I was a teenager. I can take them or leave them now.

Neither are questions of comparison valid. Is a sprinter fast? He may be fast compared to a turtle and slow compared to a Ferrari. A fast runner from 100 years ago would seem positively slow when compared to today's Olympic athletes.

Instead, a question of truth might be, "Did the sprinter run the 100 meters in 9.92 seconds?"

This question is not asking for

• 1
• 2
• next page >>

---

Add your voice

Know something about Is there such a thing as absolute truth?
We want to hear your view. Write now!