From Today’s Truth-Driver Commentary on WKZO Talk Radio AM 590 (mp3 file):
When I was a kid I always had a fantasy that when you die you get to ask a giant, god-computer any questions you wanted, and you could know the answer. As an adult, that led me to think that for all questions there actually IS an answer; it’s just that usually the answers to real-world questions are so complicated that we can’t understand them.
• Do certain pesticides, or cell phones, cause cancer?
• Do free-range chickens provide more or better nutrients to our bodies?
• What is the exact degree of human impact on global warming?
• Is John Gosselin really an agoraphobic alien, here to take Kate and their eight to Vega for re-colonization? (Okay, that one is easy … yes.)
Here’s the scoop, we may never know what is true and what isn’t, but it seems that for almost all earthly questions that we can ask, there is one truth—complex though it may be. Truth (small t) exists! The reality might even be that there are 11 dimensions and competing realities, but then THAT complex truth would still be the truth of how things actually are.
But back here in the real world there are complicated, actual effects on society of allowing gay marriage; actual, real-world effects of any given tax policy; actual, real-world effects of getting health care administration costs aligned with the rest of our global competitors. There are true effects of these things, even if they are complex and unknowable. True answers exist for all questions we can ask.
Now I don’t know those answers, and you don’t know those answers. But I will assert this; the best way to approximately and provisionally estimate truth is not through emotion-driven thinking, yelling, shouting, claims that “my god is better than your god and my god wants it this way,” or even just by repeating a statement so many times that others will accept it as truth. The way to do it is with the tools of reason, science, evidence, and calm, intellectually honest dialogue; because the closer we come to approximating truth, the better the world will be. Taking action based upon true assumptions is the path to less suffering and greater satisfaction. Conversely, false or overly simple assumptions about how the world works will never help us maximize well-being, and will never help us achieve the greatest possible benefit for the greatest number of people.
So won’t you join me in my ongoing quest to set aside ego, and pursue truth, wherever it takes us?
(Stephen L. Gibson is the author of A Secret of the Universe, a critically acclaimed, citation-rich novel about the intersections of science, reason, and faith. Still an emotion-driven thinker in recovery, Steve shares his journey in search of ever-elusive truth with thousands via his Truth-Driven Thinking podcast, and his Perspectives blog. © 2009, Truth-Driven Strategies LLC.)
Perspectives: Food for the Skeptic's Soul (if there is one) 
November 26, 2009 at 12:25 am
Truth can vary with how people define terms or what assumptions they make. One example is Geometry.In Euclidean geometry parallel lines are constant because Euclid said they behave that way. On the globe they curve toward each other and eventually intersect. It’s possible in outer space that parallel lines curve away from each other. It all depends on which truth you’re seeking. When you argue that there is one objective Truth, you have to assume that both you and reality exist.
November 26, 2009 at 11:46 pm
Couple things: 1) as I argued, even if parallel lines don’t exist (or cross on earth), or if alternate realities exist, there is still truth–namely that parallel lines cross on earth and reality doesn’t exist, etc. etc. Know that’s petty, but 2) when it comes to real-world policy/life decisions, it seems prudent to just go ahead and assume reality exists. I’ve never found the argument that this is all a delusion (which it very well may be and I’d want to know that truth if so) much of a useful debate until better evidence or arguments tell me I should spend more time on it.
Cheers and thanks, Steve
November 29, 2009 at 10:00 pm
Of course I would Steve! (in reply to the article)
I see its getting philosophical already lol. The last conversation contains some idealist elements. I am still pondering and philosophers say different things. If we are indeed living in a mind constructed reality (illusion), what evidences would convince us of that fact? Since the evidence we see would be part of that illusory world we live in, it seems paradoxical to suggest and kind of valid evidence in this context.
November 30, 2009 at 2:13 pm
Yup, agree, so we might as well play the game, since within the game it appears science, reason, logic have born fruit. But your gnostic-like point is valid 🙂 LOL. We could be in a Truman Show.
November 30, 2009 at 12:53 pm
While I’m fairly certain truth exists, there are times when intelligent logical people armed with accurate facts can never agree because they have different assumptions or define what is “true” differently. While some debates like the global warming controversy has a clear cut truth somewhere, the health care debate has no truth at its center unless you first define what is “good” policy.
I have friends who call Obama a socialist (when they’re being generous) and a government option socialism. When I was in Germany and was enjoying government-subsidized health insurance, my East German in laws lamented how in the old days of socialism health care was entirely free and now they have expensive co-payments.
The same relativistic truth applies to the Abortion debate-if someone defines human life as beginning at the moment of conception, they will never agree with someone who defines human life as requiring a certain level of brain development.
November 30, 2009 at 2:15 pm
Thanks John. Agree on healthcare debate, but what I mean is the are true effects–complex though they may be–to any policy action taken. Clearly judging the values and worths of such effects is a normative process.