Truth: The Most Abused Word

Truth: in accord with fact or reality (Webster's Dictionary)

- - - - - - - - - -
"Absolute truth is a statement that is true at all times and in all places. It is something that is always true no matter what the circumstances.[1] It is a fact that cannot be changed. For example, there are no round squares.[2] There are also no square circles.[2] The angles of a triangle add up to 180 degrees. These are all true by definition. Very similar are the propositions of Euclid, because they are proved once the axioms are accepted. One way or another, these are all truths because they are logically true. 

"Absolute truths are different from empirical truths. All the findings of science are empirical: based on evidence, and even if they are true in this world they don't need to be so in all the other possible worlds; they might also be wrong or incomplete due to lack of sufficient evidence. On the other hand, absolute truths might be based on logical truths, which are true by definition of their axioms." (Wikipedia)

- - - - - - - -

"Religious views on truth vary both between and within religions. *The most universal concept of religion that holds true in every case is the inseparable nature of truth and religious belief.

(*all religious opinions can't be correct, and none of them can verify/justify their beliefs)

"Truth is the sine qua non (without which, not) of politics. When lies overpower truth, politics dies. When politics dies, our world collapses, and we humans die too—because it is only in the world, among other humans, that we exist." " - - - We talk about polarization and the impossibility of dialogue, and what we mean is that we are no longer engaged in politics: We are not making a society together. This predicament is consistent with Arendt’s assertion that politics is impossible in the absence of truth.(link)

- - - - - - - - -

"However common it is to hear talk of “my truth, “your truth,” “her truth,” and even “no truth,” it’s worth asking: Is any of this actually true? We’re going to try and persuade you that this question matters most—making the case that

  a shared pursuit of truth (shaped by our unique perceptions, yes—but not completely constrained by them) is the only thing that makes conversation truly meaningful. 

If we enter into a conversation assuming that the truth itself is common to us both, yet recognizing that we don’t see it the same way, then we can at least begin to compare and contrast our perceptions of reality in order to sift out the truthful wheat from the troublesome chaff (exaggerations, omissions, mistakes, errors, lies, fake news, etc.)." (link)

Republicans don't respect the concept