GENIUS FORUMS

Three kinds truth, for something to be true:

The first kind of truth are natural truths independent of appearances.
The second kind of truth are the truths of appearances, independent of natural facts.
The third kind of truth is the mixture of the first two kinds. Like the truths of language and convention.

One reason to call them kinds of truth is because they are also interdependent, as one could say that nature causes appearances or affirm the contrary. To say then that something is true then would be to say that it is an appearance, natural, or a truth of language. Maybe one could say that there's also a fourth kind more associated with non-being or nothing, that is true just because of that.

These are all logical truths or in other words: the outcome follows from reasoning on truth value.

However, a meaningful distinction might still be drawn up between truth and principle.

And then, perhaps, one between principle and absolute.

Taking the other way around, the three kinds would be absolute. Truths - independent of thought/or facts, only about thoughts/or facts, and the interrelation of thoughts/or facts.

Principles would be just kinds of kinds. While the law of gravity may be irrevocable, we use language to communicate it. The same with the civil law that even may come from 'laws' of appearance.

Well although the universe has been around for a long time, should we make up this thing called a truth index?

Hear me out.

Lots of scientific laws are true for a while, such as the notion that the Earth was the center of the universe. That truth lasted for quite a few years, so we'll give it an index of 0.1 I guess.

I forgot, we also have to multiply by the cool factor, provability factor, and the technology factor.
So newer theories, like string theory, have only been around for a little while, but they have to the cool factor, and the tech factor, so we'll say they have a higher truth index, say 2.1 for instance.

You also have to keep in mind that schizophrenia and comas which are know the distort or enhance the truth index for some.

2+2=1, but only when you combine 2+2 liquids, and not a solids.

Truth index, the end all ultimate index, for a while I guess.

Taking as an example the earth being at the center of the universe, saying that or saying it is true could mean that:

It is an apparent truth, and that would just change with appearances. That it is a natural truth, this one would change only if the earth were at the center of the universe and moved. That it is a conventional truth, this one can change with subjects and the language being used.

I would question if a truth index is apparent, natural or conventional, for a start. Since there could be apparent naturality, or natural appearences, and conventional apparent...

Maybe the model I am putting forth could be put into something like this:
A language range between 0 - 1. Apparent range from -infinite to 0. Natural range from 1 to +infinite.
-infinite <= 0 ... 1 <= +infinite