Science
doesn't tell us what is true. Science observes, measures, hypothesizes
and then sets out to prove where and how it's hypotheses are wrong.
The knowledge we gain is not truth but understanding. It allows us to
make more reliable predictions. Through science we may know things
better. But through science we may also know things even better
tomorrow, next year, next century... we presume to not know so our
understanding may improve. So we may make more more accurate
predictions, perhaps new predictions, as new and/or better information
becomes available.
"Truth" is a fool's goal. For any Truth that may be asserted do not
terms and conditions apply? How then is this Truth? Certainly there are
axioms. But in terms of how to live your life, how to treat other
people, general civics, all "Truths" are conditional, multifaceted and
rely on circumstances. When such a Truth is offered even the least
skilled sophist should be able to identify how this alleged Truth is
incomplete, hit&miss or independent of reality.
Science and skeptical inquiry do not tell us what is true, but rather what is not true or otherwise irrelevant.
"Truth" only gives us something to believe. "Truth" is the antithesis of enlightenment.
"Truth" is a fool's goal. For any Truth that may be asserted do not terms and conditions apply? How then is this Truth? Certainly there are axioms. But in terms of how to live your life, how to treat other people, general civics, all "Truths" are conditional, multifaceted and rely on circumstances. When such a Truth is offered even the least skilled sophist should be able to identify how this alleged Truth is incomplete, hit&miss or independent of reality.
Science and skeptical inquiry do not tell us what is true, but rather what is not true or otherwise irrelevant.
"Truth" only gives us something to believe. "Truth" is the antithesis of enlightenment.