TRUTH KNOWLEDGE ARGUMENT HANDOUT MORALITY

TRUTH AND KNOWLEDGE

The following information about truth comes from Six Great Ideas by Mortimer Adler.

Truth of verbally expressed statements consists: in their correspondence or agreement with the
state of mind of the person making them.

Truth of thought (thinks, believes, opines) consists: in their correspondence or agreement with
what is in fact the case.

The above answer the question: What is true? NOT the question: Is it true?

Rule of reason: we ought not to contradict ourselves if we can avoid doing so.

Verdict – asserts the truth of a statement of fact:

1) beyond a reasonable doubt
2) by a preponderance of the evidence

Common sense view of truth: the non-skeptical view that understands what truth consists in –
what it means for a statement to be true or false. This view does not doubt that some statements
are true and others false and that there are ways of finding out which is which. There is a
distinction between a falsehood and a lie.

Hume – moderate skepticism – ever present doubt that should accompany most if not all of the
judgments we make concerning what is true or false (based on the fallibility of the human mind).

Two other forms of skepticism to be rejected:

1) That may be true for you, but not for me.
2) That may have been true some time ago, but no longer.

#1 fails to distinguish between the truth or falsity that inheres in a proposition or statement and
the judgment that a person makes with regard to the truth or falsity of the statement in question
(our judgment does not affect the truth of the matter itself).

Truth or falsity of a statement derives from its relation to the ascertainable facts, not from its
relation to the judgments that human beings make. We do not make statements true or false by
affirming or denying them. They have truth or falsity regardless of what we think, what opinions
we hold, what judgments we make.

Re: subjective and objective aspects of truth:

1) subjective refers to the veracity of one’s judgment
2) objective refers to the correspondence between judgment and reality
3) the objective aspect is primary

The above skepticism is identified by the terms: subjectivism and/or relativism (both of which
basically wash out the meaning of the word truth).

1
 TRUTH KNOWLEDGE ARGUMENT HANDOUT MORALITY

#2 makes the same mistake as in #1

If a statement is ever true objectively it is true forever and immutably true. What is mutable and
variable with the circumstances of time and place are the opinions we hold concerning the true
and the false, not what is objectively true or false.

If truth were entirely subjective we would have no basis for trying to resolve by rational means
our differences of opinion about what is true; nor would we have a basis for congratulating
ourselves on having made an advance by replacing a false opinion with a true one.

The objective truth of a statement may be immutable, but not our subjective judgment about
whether it is true. There are NO DEGREES OF OBJECTIVE TRUTH.

When should I say that I know? How do you draw the line between certitude and doubt?

REALM OF DOUBT
Certitude Doubt

Knowledge Opinion
strong weak strong weak

Realm of Certitude criteria include:

1) judgment cannot be challenged by the consideration of new evidence that results from
additional or improved observation
2) judgment cannot be criticized by improved reasoning or the detection of inadequacies
or errors in the reasoning we have done
3) judgments that are indubitable

Realm of Doubt criteria include:

1) judgment can be challenged in the light of additional or more accurate observations
2) judgment can be criticized on the basis of more cogent or more comprehensive
reasoning

Cf. judicial examples: beyond a reasonable doubt

: by a preponderance of the evidence

These are both in the realm of doubt not certitude. Most judgments of daily life fall under these
categories. For all practical purposes we regard judgments of the first type to be so probable that
we act on them as if they were certain (this does not make them indubitable). The essential
difference between genuine certitude and moral or practical certainty lies in the finality and
incorrigibility of indubitable judgments. We also often use judgments of the second type but
must be very cautious of the temporal limits in any judgment made on the basis of preponderance
of the evidence.

2
 TRUTH KNOWLEDGE ARGUMENT HANDOUT MORALITY

The realm of doubt is the realm of judgments that have a future, for better or worse. This is not
the case for judgments that have the finality and incorrigibility of certitude. If this is an accurate
description of the realm of doubt then all academic disciplines fall into this realm.

Does this mean that what these disciplines offer as knowledge are really collections of opinions
and beliefs? Is knowledge truth? Certainty? Can there be true knowledge? False knowledge?
How can knowledge and progress be reconciled?

To whatever extent academic disciplines have a future, to that same extent these bodies of
knowledge belong in the realm of doubt, not the realm of certitude.

The above observations about what falls under the realm of doubt can be very disturbing and can
easily result in a sense of relativism if some more precise distinctions are not made in regard to
both knowledge and opinion. There are two meanings for both knowledge and opinion:
1) Strong knowledge: knowledge cannot be false, has the infallibility, finality and
incorrigibility that are attributes of judgments in the realm of certitude.
2) Weak opinion: judgments on our part that are no more than predilections or
prejudices (no empirical or rational basis – no sufficient reason for holding).
Judgments based on emotional attachment reflecting an arbitrary and voluntary act of
the will – capricious.
3) Weak knowledge/Strong Opinion: judgments that are neither arbitrary nor voluntary;
judgments we have a rational grounds for adopting, judgments the probability of
which we can appraise in the light of all the evidence available at the moment and in
the light of the best thinking we can do (best analysis and interpretation we can make
of the evidence at the moment). They are judgments beyond reasonable doubt but not
beyond that shadow of a doubt, from which they cannot escape because they have a
future.

What is in the realm of certitude? Given the above is it empty?

1) Self-evident truths: our affirmation of them does not depend on evidence or
reasoning; we recognize their truth immediately or directly from our understanding of
what they assert – we are convinced NOT persuaded of their truth because we find it
impossible to think the opposite of what they assert (we are in no sense free to think
the opposite).
2) Evident truths: directly perceived with the merest shadow of doubt about whether I
am hallucinating or not.

If we go beyond judgments about the present existence of objects that we are at the moment
perceiving to judgments about their existence at other times and places, or to judgments about
their characteristics or attributes, we pass from the realm of certitude to doubt.

The following is taken from Ten Philosophical Mistakes by Mortimer Adler

All men desire to know though not all continue to nourish it. What is the connection between
knowledge and truth? False knowledge is a contradiction in terms and true knowledge is
redundant. Opinions on the other hand can be true or false. What is the difference between

3
 TRUTH KNOWLEDGE ARGUMENT HANDOUT MORALITY

certitude and doubt? Certitude is incorrigible and immutable while doubt is corrigible and
mutable. When anything remains in doubt even slightly it is both mutable and corrigible.

Given the above: How much knowledge do we have?

1) very little if the criteria of certitude is used
2) must make finer distinctions in the areas of knowledge and opinion
3) knowledge as certitude – few items – self-evident truths
4) is everything else opinion?
a. yes if we use the criteria of certitude
b. no if we relax the criteria
5) relaxing the criteria means that we recognize that there are opinions we can affirm on
the basis of evidence and reasons that have sufficient probative force to justify our
claiming AT THE TIME that the opinion affirmed is true
6) we should be prepared to say that such corrigible, mutable opinions are knowledge –
knowledge of truths that have a future in which they may undergo correction or
alteration and even rejection
7) the above should be distinguished from mere opinions asserted without any basis at
all in evidence or reason (personal prejudices are such mere opinions)

What is the meaning of the term belief and its multiple uses?
1) used to reflect measure of doubt about an opinion we hold based on evidence and
reason
2) used to signify a total lack of evidence or reasons for asserting an opinion
3) it is inappropriate to use the word belief when referring to self-evident or necessary
truths

The realm of mere opinions includes:

1) personal prejudices
2) all matters of personal taste (even though one may have reasons here these reasons
carry no weight with others)
3) Knowledge can thus be extended to cover: all corrigible and mutable opinions that
can be asserted on the basis of evidence and reasons available at a given time;
covering opinions affirmed (1) beyond a reasonable doubt, (2) beyond a shadow of a
doubt, and (3) by a preponderance of the evidence.

In general knowing in no way affects/effects or alters the thing we know – an exception occurs in
the case of quantum mechanics where the instruments used to observe do affect/effect the
phenomena.

The knowable exists independently of the knower and is whatever it is whether it is known or not
and however it is known. The word most used to signify this independent character of the
knowable is REALITY. If there were no reality, nothing the existence and character of which is
independent of the knowing mind, there would be nothing knowable. The reality that is the
knowable (1) may or may not be physical, (2) may or may not consist solely of things perceptible
to our senses, and (3) its existence must be public not private (must be knowable by two or more
persons).

4
 TRUTH KNOWLEDGE ARGUMENT HANDOUT MORALITY

Therefore, knowledge covers:

1) necessary and self-evident truths
2) opinions asserted on the basis of sufficient evidence and reasons
3) things about which we can say both that we know them and that we believe them
because some doubt remains
4) judgments that are either true or false

The term mere opinion applies to whatever is deemed by anyone not to be knowledge in any of
the foregoing senses.

The following comes from Six Great Ideas by Mortimer Adler.

Different disciplines pursue truth in different ways (but they do not pursue different truth/s)
employing different methods and devices.

Pursuit of truth involves:

1) addition of new truths to the body of settled or established truths already achieved
2) replacement of less accurate or less comprehensive formulations by better ones
3) discovery of errors or inadequacies/rectifications of judgments found erroneous
4) discarding of generalizations that have been falsified

By all such steps the sphere of truth enlarges and comes closer to the whole truth. But this ideal
of the whole truth will not be achieved – the pursuit is endless.

The sphere of truth is the sphere of those matters about which we think disagreement is
profitable precisely because we think these are matters about which it is possible to resolve
differences of opinion and to reach agreement instead.

Matters of Truth:
1) about matters of truth dispute is fruitful because disagreements can be resolved
2) disagreement cannot be tolerated for long, we should always work toward a
resolution no matter how long it takes
3) mathematics, exact and experimental sciences (we expect resolution of differences
here to be resolved rationally
4) involve judgments that are determined intrinsically by the substance of the matters
being considered and by reference to the probative force of the relative evidence and
the cogency of the applicable reasoning
5) objective considerations play the major role
6) trans-cultural and global

Matters of Taste:
1) there is no point in arguing, differences of opinion are irreconcilable
2) disagreement should be tolerated
3) cuisine, social matters, patterns of family life (here there is no expectation that
differences can or should be resolved)
4) irreducible pluralism in all matters of taste

5
 TRUTH KNOWLEDGE ARGUMENT HANDOUT MORALITY

5) an act of choice springing from emotional predispositions and cultural conditioning

6) temperamental inclinations, emotional predilections, cultural attachments
predominate
7) factional and fragmented

Philosophical opinions and religious beliefs occupy a middle ground between these extremes.
The prevalent view today puts philosophy and religion on the side of taste (this has not always
been the case and it is not necessarily correct). Philosophy is placed in the middle because there
has been less evident progress in the pursuit of philosophical truth than what is manifest in math
and science. Also there has been less agreement among philosophers throughout the ages.
Religion is less amenable to resolution by rational means (therefore closer to a matter of taste).
But missionary proselytizing seems to involve reason not just emotion.