Truth is an illusion

What we perceive to be a truth is simply an illusion, an illusion which has been derived from an assumption of what we think is true. This assumption is a mere concoction of conditioned responses.

My question. Would it really matter if we all plugged into the matrix? If we aren't perceiving true reality now, then how is that any different to being inside the matrix?

Truth is what happens, and what happens is what existing things do. Nothing illusional, are senses are trustworthy. And non-falsifiable philosophical theories on this will help us to progress epistemologically, this includes are knowledge to keep civilisation going... Medicine, engineering and above all, basic science. The very thing we depend on to know anything, and it works.

In short: existentialism is the truth, as all kinds of things are surrounding the mankind. That is a point in which I agree with you. But what is about knowledge? are there really knowledges - Egyptology in terms of the pyramids for instance - which are not an illusion? if they are not an illusion, then they are facts and facts are true. So are there no doubts in the whole world?

Of course there are doubts and knowledge (true knowledge) isn't and shouldn't be subjected to a priori opinion. Facts by definition are true yes and truth is what happens, when we find out the truth of something - even if the method is disagreed upon - we still insist that to find out we must accept that something has happened and we have to find the causes for it, or we are unsure if something does happen or has happened so we will check to find its presence in the universe and then the causes.

I can't see how truth or true/factual knowledge is subjected to disagreement in terms of its meaning.


Posted from TSR Mobile

Whilst it would appear that beliefs and reality can coincide, due to the constant process of conjuncture and refutation I would argue that we can therefore never know absolute or objective truths, we can only know, partial, relative truths, subjective truths, probabilities, beliefs and the cogito ergo sum.

The only place in the universe where objectivity literally becomes a matter of reference frame is black holes (Holographic Principle to be more precise). If by you mean probabilities as in not knowing to 100% then that is absolutely correct. But the scientific method teases out any subjectivity by constant third party perspective where any subjective becomes removed.
Any scientific field is based upon this and from you're saying, if a family member was murdered, and the detectives found out who it was... who are you to be mad at the murderer when by such philosophies as your own, it's merely a subjective truth of the detective and the culprit is guilty on the basis of belief? Are you sure you don't want to think about this? Because if you or anyone disagrees with this way of thinking or the scientific method by extension, then that's something to worry about for sure.
Posted from TSR Mobile

Whilst it would appear that beliefs and reality can coincide, due to the constant process of conjuncture and refutation I would argue that we can therefore never know absolute or objective truths, we can only know, partial, relative truths, subjective truths, probabilities, beliefs and the cogito ergo sum.