Systems for Converging Towards Truth

To define truth in the most basic sense, it is the state or quality of being in accord with fact or reality.

It's an essential aspect of our thinking, decision-making, and how we interact with each other and the world around us. It's crucial for our social structures to function, from legal proceedings to scientific research.

However, defining truth is not always easy. Different people may have varied interpretations, leading to disagreements. To help bring us closer to an agreed-upon truth, we have several tools at our disposal, including philosophy, the scientific method, legal systems, and journalistic standards.

Truth, from a philosophical perspective, is a theoretically technical way to define the truth and related concepts. Various theories, from relativism to objectivism, offer differing viewpoints on what constitutes truth. Relativism posits that truth is subjective and can vary among individuals or cultures, essentially arguing that there are multiple truths. In contrast, objectivism suggests that truth is an objective reality independent of individual or societal beliefs.

The scientific method approach relies on evidence and logical thinking to understand the natural world. It begins with a prediction, which is then tested through experiments and observations. If the results consistently support the prediction, it's seen as a valid explanation until new evidence suggests otherwise. This process, although it's often slow, brings us gradually closer to understanding the truth about the natural world.

Journalism aims to accurately gather and present information, serving as a bridge of truth between events and the public. From a journalistic perspective accuracy, objectivity, fairness, and verification are the most powerful aspects to seek the truth. From a consumer perspective credibility and accountability are some of the best standards to decide if a journalist ought to be trusted.

In the legal system, truth is often determined through a structured process of evidence presentation and examination. All sides in a case present their arguments and evidence, which can include documents, physical items, and testimonies. The reliability and relevance of this evidence are then assessed by a judge or jury. The adversarial nature of the system is designed to ensure that all pertinent facts and perspectives are explored. From these evaluations, a verdict or ruling is reached, representing the legal system's best determination of the truth of the matter at hand.

Even though all these tools have seemed to have proven in time to be a better route towards truth than the alternatives, reaching a consensus on truth can be challenging. We often encounter disagreements due to using different data sets, varying viewpoints, interpretations, and biases. Sometimes even institutions that work well in theory to determine truth can make mistakes or be highjacked. Sometimes, the truth can disrupt established norms and thus encounter resistance. Also, we must acknowledge that while we aim for absolute truth, we often have to settle for relative truths, constrained by our limited perception and understanding.

Some of the questions we will tackle in this event:

What are the best current systems for determining truth?

What are the strengths of these systems?

What are the issues with these systems?

How can systems for converging toward truth be improved?