I gave several definitions in the previous post. I’ll just past them here again:
-the actual state of a matter
-conformity with fact or reality
-a verified or indisputable fact, proposition, principle, or the like (e.g. mathematical truths)
-an obvious or accepted fact
-honesty; integrity
-agreement with a standard or original
-accuracy, as of position or adjustment
-fidelity or constancy

Would it be acceptable to define truth, in your opinion, as a universal? Or do I gather right that truth is relative depending on the situation (To wit: ‘Truth in what arena sir?).

Exactly.

In your opinion, must truth be an observable?

Not always. I can’t directly observe another’s pain, or emotions. There are probably better examples. Those just popped to mind.

does this “truth” need to be observed by you or would other witnesses provide sufficient evidence to verify?

For those things that are observable, I don’t have to observe them. It helps, but I can take some things on the credible say-so of others. For instance, I’ve never observed Madrid, but I can take the word of others about it.

Which now leads to queries about how one assesses whether to accept a thing as true or not.

Just using Madrid as an example I can come up with some criteria.
-How important is the truth/untruth of the matter in question? (This effects how strong the supporting data must be. In the case of Madrid, it’s not very important.)
-How much data is there for or against the matter in question? (For Madrid there’s beaucoup data for it and just about none against it.)
-How reliable are the sources providing the data. (For Madrid, I find maps, travel brochures, and other peoples tales of it reliable, since all of those have been pretty accurate for other places I have been to.)

Them’s just some quick thoughts.

You have provided types of truths, things that qualify truth, and possible ways of arriving at truth… but what is truth?

The answer is 42.

Seriously.
Truth is defined as the quality or state of being true or that which most accurately corresponds to reality. “Truth” must be qualified with something: what is the truth… about what? The truth about the acorn? The truth about the properties of gold? This has nothing to do with some sort of futile inquiry into “truth” as “subjective” or “objective” or “relative” or “absolute.” The “truth” concerning the properties of wood is obviously going to be different than the “truth” concerning the properties of hydrogen.

My following opinion is mine, not Leopardus’. Truth does not have to be observable. However, what is the significance of the “truth” of the tree that fell in the forest? Using Hume’s famous example, no one can verify that the tree fell or not because it has not affected any of their senses. Of course this does not mean it did not happen, but what it does mean is that it didn’t matter. At the same time, the tree is only a hypothesis, but one that could be verified. So to answer your question, the “truth” of something does not need verification to be a reality, but it does need verification if it needs to have any value attributed to it.

Forgive me if I am plodding down a one way street, but out of a desire to understand what you mean, allow me to ask a few more questions.

You have provided types of truths, things that qualify truth, and possible ways of arriving at truth… but what is truth? Would it be acceptable to define truth, in your opinion, as a universal? Or do I gather right that truth is relative depending on the situation (To wit: ‘Truth in what arena sir?). I realize that the later is somewhat of a stretch and I don’t wish to misrepresent you, but this is the extent of my understanding.

In your opinion, must truth be an observable? Drawing from some of your previous comments, this seems to be another limitation on what truth is. If this is the case… does this “truth” need to be observed by you or would other witnesses provide sufficient evidence to verify?

Thank you for putting up with my interrogatives.

~For the Pursuit of Learning~

Nicely asked. And interesting. I’ve put down some thoughts. Here they are, such as they are:

What is truth?

There are several possible ways to define it. Here are a few.
-the actual state of a matter
-conformity with fact or reality
-a verified or indisputable fact, proposition, principle, or the like (e.g. mathematical truths)
-an obvious or accepted fact
-honesty; integrity
-agreement with a standard or original
-accuracy, as of position or adjustment
-fidelity or constancy

Then there are different areas of inquiry regarding truth. Historical, legal, scientific, philosophical, theological, and so on. Each of those areas can have differing standards and methods for determining what is true about a given thing. And even within each of those areas standards and methods vary.

So that’s a long way to answer your question with a question. To wit: “Truth in what arena sir?” Obviously the answer varies depending on just what we are discussing.

[So did I do a good job of ducking that one? ]

Why does it matter?

I could answer almost the same as for the first question. The importance of truth varies depending on the arena we are looking into.

[I ducked another one, eh?]

I tend to think in terms of science since that’s where my mind is most of my day. There truth is usually easy to assess. If I look at an MRI and see a fracture line running along the ulna, the flat out truth is that you broke your arm. Further truth is that you better immobilize that arm until things heal or you’re apt to suffer more damage.

Of course probability figures in. That arm might heal even if you don’t take good care of it, but the probability is slim.

I think that truth depends in considerable measure on the variance of probability in the area being considered. With science probability is often fairly narrow, and it can usually be calculated accurately.

But if we move into other areas of inquiry, probability can become quite broad and much harder to calculate.

There’s more here, but right now I have to do some work or there is a high probability that I’ll fall behind and get in trouble. Later…..

Interesting post. Yet, this post raises the questions.
If truth matters:

1) What is truth?
2) Why does it matter?

This is not a challenge of your opinion. I have no desire to start a long discussion where we each state our point of views and pointlessly try to convince each other of erroneous propositions that each will most certainly make in the eyes of the other. I am nothing more than a student seeking to learn. So… If you would be so kind…