(Z.1) No truth is false but a truth
in time present can become false in time future.
(Z.2) Two kind of truths exist, namely objective
truths and subjective truths.
(Z.2.1) A postulation is considered to have objective
truth when its truth conditions are met without bias
caused by the mind of a sentient being.
That is, truth is a property possessed the object
itself. As examples include the earth revolves around the sun and the sun does
not revolve around the earths. Both are taken to be objective truths.
(Z.2.1.1) Objective
truths cannot be altered by human thought.
(Z.2.1.1.1) Postulations
falsely held as objective truths can be disproven by human thoughts.
As an example, the once held objective truth that the earth is
has been disproven as a truth at all.
(Z.2.2) A postulation is considered to have subjective
truth when its truth conditions are met with bias caused
by the mind of a sentient being. As
an example, the statement that "It’s hot/cold outside" is a subjective
truth that depends upon the perception of the speaker of
what is hot or cold. Morals are another example of what might be taken as subjective
truths by sentient minds.
(Z.2.2.1) Some would argue
that all scientific knowledge is subjective
truths because they depend upon perceptions
resulting from observations of actions thought
to be the product of causes and effect. This philosophy
holds that scientific knowledge gained by observation
is objective knowledge unless proven otherwise.
(Z.3) Postulations held as logical truths and mathematical
truths can result in a conflict called a paradox which
cannot be proven any further by a given system of logic truths or mathematical
truths. A famous example of such a paradox is If the village barber
shaves all and only those villagers who do not shave themselves who shaves the
barber? Another in mathematics is "What set contains the set of all
sets?"
(Z.3.1) That a set of logical truths
or mathematical truths cannot extend beyond a paradox
is a truth that any and all systems of logic and mathematics are
incomplete and cannot be used to prove all truths.
(Z.3.1.1) This incompleteness
reveals itself in the processes of mind in the human brain that
often result in moral paradoxes. As an example, if one holds the morals
that one should not lie and that one should act with kindness to another, what
do you do if the other person asked you for your opinion of their new hairstyle
and you thing it looks horrible? In the case you must violate one or both of
your morals to give an answer. Are you unkind and say that it looks
horrible or do you lie and say it looks beautiful? How do you decide
your the action of your answer to the question? Which one of you
is to suffer the emotion of pain (you by not telling lying or the
other by lying) and which one the emotion of pleasure (you by
telling lying or the other by not lying) ? Your system of moral
reasoning has reached its limits and must use some valuation of
the two morals in this particular case to decide
your response of which the morals in and of themselves are
incapable of producing by reason of pure logic
alone. Indeed, a moral is a moral and all are
absolute and of equal relevance until evaluated one against
another for each case to which they are applied.
(Z.4) The only absolute truths are the laws
of nature. Any apparent incompleteness associated with them is the
result of our lack of knowledge and understanding of
them. The laws of nature is the foundation upon which all objective
truths and subjective truths are built.
(Z) No truth in and of itself can be false but may become false in time future. Proposition of a truth maybe either objective or subjective. Objective truths cannot be altered by human thought but subjective truths can. Subjective truths may result in paradoxes which cannot be resolved with human thought. The laws of nature are absolute and inviolate objective truths.