Fact vs. Opinion; Truth vs Goodnes

Does our truth change with time? Or is that what's called hypocrisy?

I have recently had a conversation with my friend about relations and love and the kind of opinions we have about them. Then it suddenly struck me, I did not hold this belief or did not think that is the truth few years back and may not hold the same belief few years later. Is this being an hypocrite? or growing up? Dont we change the truth as we grow?

Re-Ask

Unfollow17

Comment1

Share

Downvote

Jonathan's Answer

View 15 Other Answers

Jonathan Doolin, generator of hypotheses

277 Views

I think we tend to make a false equivalency between the true vs. false spectrum and the good vs. evil spectrum.

It's a fairly well established that there are true and false statements.  When you say something happened, it either did or it didn't.  When you say something will happen, it either will or it won't.  Insofar as truth changes regarding matters of fact, anything in the past is an unchangeable truth.  Anything we say about the future is a changeable truth.

On the other hand, regarding what is good and evil, this is generally agreeed to be a matter of opinion, and societal values.  There are a few who believe in some kind of "absolute" good.  Actually, I would say MOST people believe in an "absolute" good and "absolute" evil.  For instance, it is generally regarded that slavery, child molestation, and murder are all criminal activities, and would be wrong even if the laws allowed them.  That is, it isn't a matter of societal conformity that we don't murder each other, but because it is a matter of universal human rights.

So do these universal human rights exist as fundamental self-evident principles, or are they simply arbitrary, and continually changing constructions, adapting to the societies by which they are affirmed? 

I think as science improves, we are continually moving toward greater knowledge and truth, even with greater and greater complexity of our understanding.  Using the scientific method, we are able to move forward in a clear direction truthward. 

On the other hand, I'm not sure if such a clear methodology to approach moral righteousness has been established.  We still have major disagreement, for instance, on whether it is right and just for a CEO to make hundreds of times as much money as his employees do, or whether pre-emptive strikes are appropriate in warfare, or sanctions, or whether torture should be used in dire circumstances, or whether assisted suicide is okay, or abortion is okay, or killing and eating animals, or looking at pornography, or divorce, or public nudity, or wearing a shirt with pictures of pretty women, or many thousands of other issues where there is a moral disagreement.  Despite the strong opinions that people have on both sides of the issue, there does not seem to be a way to make a true/false call on any of these things.

All we can do is ask ourselves what kind of world we want to live in?  And then try to make guidelines to bring about the positive changes we desire.