> I've slowly been converging upon the belief that there's no such thing as "truth". There are only models and predictions, and some models lead to better predi

> I've slowly been converging upon the belief that there's no such thing as "truth". There are only models and predictions, and some models lead to better predictions than other models. (What then is a mathematical truth?) This seems like saying, "The truth is that there is no truth." Or the truth is that there is a set of models which are more or less the case and this meta-model is the actual truth. In both cases, the argument seems to implicitly rest upon the truth, or a belief of the nature of truth without getting out from under the thing that the argument attempts to deny. How can we talk about there being no such thing as truth without it turning into a sentence like: This statement is false?