Objections to truth existing
In the last article we defined truth and if it exists. Now let’s deal with some objections. What does it even matter if there is truth and why are we wasting time on this? It matters a great deal and I would encourage you not to allow yourself to be apathetic about it. Just take a look around the world today and one can see the disparity in what goes for truth these days. If you are truthful with yourself, you can probably identify some claim or statement that someone has made that did not sit right with you because it was not true.
It matters because something cannot be true for all persons, at all times, in all places, and in the same way. It matters because the truth of certain claims can have eternal consequences so it is of the utmost importance we get this right. Edward Feser submits, “So, for example, our nature or essence is to be rational animals, and reason or intellect has as its final cause the attainment of truth. Hence the attainment of truth is good for us, just as the gathering of acorns is good for a squirrel.”[1] Part of our essence as people is to seek after truth. So, what are some objections to my claim:
- That’s true for you, but not for me.
- There is no such thing as the truth.
- There is no such thing as absolute truth.
- There is not truth in anything but science.
- You should doubt everything.
- You should not judge.[2]
- That may have been true once, or for another cultural group, but is no longer valid now.
Many of you may have encountered such claims or objections, or perhaps you have not thought of these and you are now asking yourself how you would address any one of these. There is a simple technique that Norman L. Geisler and Frank Turek have coined “The Roadrunner Tactic”[3] that easily and effectively deals with these sorts of claims. Those of us a tad older will recall Wile E. Coyote and his schemes to catch the roadrunner in hopes of a meal. However, Roadrunner always turned the plan around on Wile E. Coyote.
That is exactly what we can do here; turn the claim around or apply the claim to itself. We will look at the first four objections and in the next article finish the remainder
- That’s true for you, but not for me.
- Our response: Is that true for everyone?
- There is no such thing as the truth.
- Our response: Is that true?
- There is no such thing as absolute truth.
- Our response: Are you absolutely sure?
- There is no truth in anything but science.
- Our response: Is that a scientific truth?[4]
Now let us examine or interrogate this one a bit. The claim that there is no truth in anything but science. This sounds like a solid scientific claim, but is it? If we interrogate this and dissect it the claim is that: science = truth and even truth = science some may be so bold to claim.
Pause and think about that statement for a moment. You may want it to be true, but is it?
Does this sound correct to you?
What is science? Science is a process or method that really seeks to falsify a hypothesis and if it fails one may be able to interpret that evidence.
One would then repeat the scientific process and determine if the same results occur. If this happens repeatedly then one can begin to interpret the evidence and develop a knowledge claim. The scientist can now perhaps draw some conclusions and tell us something. What the scientist tells us may, in fact, correspond with reality and if it does, great. Turek often reminds people that science does not tell us anything, scientists do. Science is but a process that requires an intelligent mind to interpret the data and communicate it. Data of the physical or material world. So, together we see the knowledge claim does not stand scrutiny or interrogation since the claim is not able to be taken into a lab and proven. Why? Because it is actually a philosophical and worldview claim that is actually false.
I think you will agree we can see the pattern already and next article we will conclude our endeavor into truth.
[1] Edward Feser, Edward Feser, The Last Superstition: A Refutation of the New Atheism (Southbend, IN: St. Augustine’s Press, 2008), loc. 2644, ch. 4 “Scholastic Aptitude”, subheading “Natural law”, Kindle.
[2] Geisler and Turek, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist, Kindle.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Geisler and Turek, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist, Kindle.