TRUTH Vs MYTH


"There is only one truth, but it requires the right amount of information. In the graph, only the 3rd picture allow us to find the truth with certainty "

What is truth, what is lie.

How is it possible to affirm the truthness of a theory, of such scope as Theory of Unification? How can we prove that our sentence "All what exists is an Organism of Energy and Time" describes the nature of the Universe and its species?

What is the difference between falsety and truth?

Before you explore that sentence which explains the nature of God and the Universe, we have to deal with perhaps a more boring subject, but fundamental to make meaningful our research: the nature of truth and falsety and how to differenciate them. Why certain facts and statements are truth, and why others are not. And specifically why in human sciences and religions, there are so many false truths, dogmas, and myths, that are maintained regardless of the mounting evidence against them.

In brief the answer to the first question is: truths depend on the quantity of information we have on a given subject. The more information we have the closer to a perceivable truth we will be.

While on the other hand lies are a product of misinformation - when less information we have as in the left photograph, the more difficult is to assess the truthness of any statement or nature of any event.

Yet lies have also very often a purpose: to cheat the receptor of the lie, in order to manipulate him into a given action. Indeed, since we live in a vital Universe, in which all what happens has a bio-logical meaning, information is synonimous of power and control, two fundamental parameters in the relationships of the different cells of any social organism. So when information exists, is often controlled, manipulated, and used to take advantage of it, for selfish purposes. This happens also in History, where truths are often ideological - that is used with the purpose of achieving selfish power, from the perspective of he who utters the truth. Let us then consider the 2 fundamental elements of any theory of truth: the relationship between truth, language and information; and the relationship between truth and social power.

Information is the key to true knowledge.

Most believers in any theory on reality do not question the nature of the truths they learn. They merely learn them. So happens to scientific and religious believers with their ideas about the Universe and God. Few people have a critical mind, and use methods to distinguish truth from falsity, right from wrong. The result is people learn in a rather mechanical manner, myths and falsities that become perpetuated as truths by the mere repetition of their contents, reproduced from mind to mind, from believers to believers.

Yet, we cannot absorb and know all the information about reality. So we have to build partial models of truth, with the limited information we have. And that introduces a lot of possible errors.

Those questionable truths are the basis of our knowledge, and the reason why our knowledge on God and the Universe is so poor: Human knowledge is full of myths, partial truths, deformation and aberrations of thought, caused by the lack of a critical method to understand truth, and the lack of information on the issues we deal with. A fact that happens specially when we deal with subjects of which we have so little information such as the Total Universe, and that entity, invisible to our senses, called God.

Take the example of the photograph: in the first photo, there is little information to our senses. If I show you that photo only, your information will be so scanty that you will give wrong answers to the question: what is this? I asked many people and none guessed it. There were very different answers, from a picture of the lungs of a person, to a magnetic field, but none even approached to the truth.

You can compare that ignorance, to what happens with the concept of God. We cannot see God, we cannot smell God, so what is God? People also say all kind of things, mostly wrong answers...

Then I showed the second photography that has more information. Here most people guessed it was a bottle, but many did not. Only when I showed the third photography everybody agreed on the truth: it was a bottle of beer.

Partial information on the knowledge of God.

The conclusion is obvious. Truths can be known with enough amount of information. Which explains why our knowledge of God and the Universe has widened as History went by, and more information about those subjects accumulated. First we considered the Universe ended on our valley and tribe, so Tribal religions in which man was the mind of the Universe appeared. Then those religions widened to include all mankind, as our knowledge of the Universe grew to include the Planet Earth and the closest stars... The kinnest observers widened already in the ancient times the search for a God, mind of the Universe, to the entire set of species of this planet and beyond. Science went further adding another language of information to the quest, digital thought, numbers that could gather more knowledge about the Universe. We conclude that knowledge through the use of languages of information is the key to find truths to any question, including the nature of God and the Universe.

Problem is languages only offer partial information

And yet we have hardly gone "beyond the first blurred photography of the example", in the knowledge of God, and "the second Photography" in the knowledge of the Universe. At least you might think, we know about the Universe as much as that second beer photography. So we know a lot about the Universe, much more than about God. Following that reasoning you might think that since some guessed that second photography, some scientists should have solved the nature of the Universe with that limited information.

More or less that reasoning explains the sheer optimism of our believers in science that despise religion. Science they say offer a lot of information on the Universe, while religions has little evidence on God. Science therefore is truth.

Those scientists of course ignore that the truthness of their theories has a clear limit: all right we have a lot of information the Universe. Yet that information is still very limited, and what is even more worrisome, it will always be limited, deformed, partially false. Why?

Because to know, we need a language of knowledge. And any language of knowledge, words, images, sounds, smells, numbers... introduces when it captures reality a linguistic deformation that simplifies, and deforms reality.

Let us bring a classic illustration of that linguistic limit.

All languages are simplified information on Reality

Magritte, a XX century avant-garde painter, draw a pipe and put below this words: This is not a pipe. People observed that painting puzzled. The pipe was done in a realist manner, and it seemed a pipe as much as the third photograph seems a bottle of beer. Yet Magritte was putting the question in the right place, unlike scientists do: That pipe was a painting, a linguistic statement, a form of language, not the material pipe made of wood, tobacco and smoke. So happens to the bottle of beer. It is a photograph, a digital image sustained by electronic bites of information, to a crystal, paper, and liquid mixture...

Our believers in science or religion often forget that their statements and truths are only linguistic images of the Universe and God, of mathematical or verbal nature - as the painting and the photograph are linguistic images of visual nature of a pipe and a bottle of beer. So in the same manner that pipe's painting and that beer's photograph have limited information and introduce aberrations on their truths (the color of the bottle of beer is actually more clear, the pipe of Magritte has a bi-dimensional aberration of form proper of all paintings), so happens to the linguistic statements that science and religion make about god and the Universe.

A mathematical equation is not reality. It describes reality, and introduces certain deformations proper of the syntax, and simplified reality that mathematics creates. Indeed, a mathematical graph is a linguistic tool not reality itself. You might plot the brightness of stars, but that is only a part of the information stars hold - a very partial truth. In that sense, you can compare scientific truths, its graphs and numbers to that pipe's painting: a simplified truth. The big difference between Magritte and Kepler, is that Magritte is conscious of the limits of his painting language and says, this is not a pipe. Kepler however believes that his numbers describe the Universe, with that typical arrogance of most scientists, and says: God has waited 5000 years (those of creation according to the Bible) to find an intelligence like his, to understand the Universe (that of Mr. Kepler). Be aware of those who talk of total truth. They tend to be the most ignorant of all believers.

The same happens with Religious truths. They tend to be a verbal statement about God, a truth dependant in the syntax and informative limits of the verbal language.

So truths are relative linguistic statements about reality

What this means is that languages carry information about Real Entities, but that information is limited, and very dependant in the capacity of the language to carry information. Since words and numbers, the two main languages of information used by human minds are very limited in that capacity to carry information, our truths about god and the Universe are limited too:

Absolute truths are impossible to achieve because languages are limited in their information. This implies that the attitude of most believers in science or religion, like Mr. Kepler, or a Fundamentalist, are primitive, inquisitorial, and misleading. All truths are relative, because all truths are linguistic statements.

Should this mean we cannot find the truth about God and the Universe? Not necessarily. It means we have to change our definitions of truth, and the methods we use to search for it.

Then, how can we know that a certain theory on reality is accurate enough to explain reality?

To answer that how we need to know more about the nature of languages, in which theories about reality are crafted.

What is a language. Why each language has only a truth.

What is a language?

A language is a system of informative symbols that represents facts about the Universe. Thus a language perceives the Universe and informs an organism which talks the language about it, with the intention to help that organism (and by the same token the brain's language) to survive. To that aim the language has to objectively portray the Universe as it is, so the speaker does not commit mistakes and dies. If you are blind you might fall into a cliff, if your deaf, a lion will come too close before you notice, and so on.

That correct, survival portrait of the Universe by a language, is what we call the truth of a language, different from the Total Truth of Reality (as the pipe painting is different from the pipe). Still is the best truth we can get.

How many truthful portraits of reality can make a language? Surprisingly enough most languages have only a perfect image, which is the limit of truthness of the language. This happens because there is only one Universe. So an objective truth, a linguistic portrait of that Universe, have to be also a single one.

For example 2+2 =4 is a mathematical truth, because if you put 2 pears and 2 pears, you have 4 pears in reality. So within the limits of the abstract concept a set of beings, reality makes 2+2=4 the only true mathematical set, reflection of the real event of putting together 2 and 2 pears.

A language is a mirror of reality. You can get many images, but only a point of focus, that best portraits reality. Any language of perception explains Reality with the 'truth of the language', which is the best combination of syntax and semantics, that will reflect the Universe with the language.

What is the key to find such verbal or visual, focused truths, instead of unfocused lies? Information. Which increases when we use multiple languages to scan reality. When we use instead of the verbal, religious method, or the mathematical scientific method, the linguistic method, and use all languages and informations gathered by mankind, to find the common grounds, in which to build a single truth, a common idea that unifies all other ideas and knowledges of reality.

Linguistic Truths are fogged by the survival nature of the game.

Yet, even when we have enough information about certain subjects we are unable to arrive to evident truths. Take the case of History and economics. We live under the rule of money. We spend most of our lives consuming and working with machines. And we still have not serious, scientific definitions of money and machines. Or take the case of religion. We know the Universe is huge, immense. We know human beings belong all to the same species. And yet very able people still believe in tribal religions that make them superior to other human beings, races apart, from our common race. Why? What is the reason for the existence of myths, half truths, or outright lies that tamper our quest for knowledge and fog the mind of millions of people. The answer of course is that truth, is not the main goal of human species, but survival and happiness are. Happiness, a state of relative balance with the Universe, in which there is no fear against our existence, seems to be a common desire of all the species of reality. To achieve that state, humans prefer to ignore negative information, and maintain myths, half truths, positive to themselves, that do not bother their existence. So we prefer to think we are sons of god, and not yet another species that follows the Laws of the Universe. We prefer to think that money and machines are positive to man, since they control so many acts of our existence, than exploring the frightening truth of a biological evolution of machines, and money.

Problem is that those half truths or lies, are repeated and become cultural traditions difficult to abandon. For one thing. Species who do not understand truth, are easier to manipulate, enslave, ab=use, and destroy. So in an organic society, in which there are classes based in information, and power over the lives of others, there is a vested interest in those who control society, to maintain the people under self-interested lies, fictional myths, and concepts that will prevent them from controlling their own lives. So there is a fight between truth and happiness that gives origin to the myth, and a fight between the information castes of mankind, and the animetals that control modern societies, and the human mass, who aspires to similar degree of power, origin of censorship in truths that affect power, specially economics and history. Not so in this web, dedicated to the search of truth, beyond myths and agendas. We talk in all those cases in which a certain theory or truth is maintained not by the goal of knowledge, but by the game of social power, of an ideology of knowledge. Ideologies of knowledge are unfortunately many. More than any of us could imagine in a first analysis of scientific and religious disciplines. And we, include science in the list of "ideological systems of knowledge", despite the claims of the scientific method, to be the truth of human thought, because indeed, science is also an ideology of power...

Myths in History, religion, economics and science. Truth and power.

It is indeed a fact of History, and all the languages of power used to control it, that truths are a scarce commodity, and yet everybody claims to have the absolute truth. In religion, in science, in politics, in economical forums, the concept of truth is common currency. And often the more loud the philosopher claims his truth, the less evidence there is of such truth. We consider in other pages specifically the multiple myths and ideologies of science, economics, politics, war, and religion that plague our knowledge. Let us now consider the alternative to those myths: the truths of human societies, which are the truths and laws common to all social organisms of the Universe; and the reasons why those truths are denied and substituted by the myths studies on those hyperlinks.