5 ms·

Maybe it's because defining what the "truth" is is complicated. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth

• Filligree 9y ago
  The way humanity uses that word can sometimes be complicated, but don't fall into the trap of thinking that truth is: http://yudkowsky.net/rational/the-simple-truth/ http://yudkowsky.net/rational/the-simple-truth/
  • banned1 9y ago
    Good one. But what happens when you have two competing truths?
    • Filligree 9y ago
      You discover that "truth" is the wrong word to describe at least one of them.
      • banned1 9y ago
        There are two truths: 1) People need jobs today 2) Coal drives global warming Which one do you act on today? Those are the type of discussions people in decision making roles are wrestling with, which may be a different perspective than that of arm-chair decision making like the one we do here in this thread.
        • Filligree 9y ago
          A truth being inconvenient in combination with a different truth... doesn't make it any less true. You don't need to decide between them. They're both true, regardless of your policy choices.
        • dragonwriter 9y ago
          > There are two truths: 1) People need jobs today 2) Coal drives global warming > Which one do you act on today? The two competing options seem to be: (1) both, or (2) neither, using denial of the second as a empty gesture toward addressing the first. Doesn't really seem to be a fundamental conflict between them.