Is there objective Truth?

[pocaracas]

@pocaracas
"Any mechanism claiming to provide a truth with is closer to the Truth, other than Science, is lying."

That is a philosophical statement, not a scientific one. A contradictory, Self defeating statement. Science is built from the ground up from the presupposition that we can KNOW anything at all. Again building off of philosphy.

I take it you agree with everything else I wrote, then...

So... what's your problem?
I'm going to try to work backward from what you wrote to try and make sense of it...
I think you're entering mental masturbatory territory with that "presupposition that we can know anything at all".
What does it mean for a person to know something? To have information stored in her brain pertaining to some event or object... that's what I'd say.

Are you wanting to claim that our brains are incapable of holding information? That would indeed be a self-defeating statement.

Science is a collection of information that humanity has deemed the most trustworthy, unbiased and independent from psychological faults.
Science is also a collection of methodologies to arrive at the collection of information and ever refine it.

Oh... OH.... OHOHOHOHOHOHOH... you're wanting to go meta on the world's ass!
Science can only operate on an existing Universe, hence we presuppose that the Universe exists in order to apply the science that describes the Universe. Isn't this what being a solipsist is all about? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solipsism

If you want to get stuck on solipsism, be my guest, but know that there is no way out of there, without making a few assumptions... and the very first one is that the outer world does exist and is measurable and our senses measure it to a certain degree.


Anyway, you are aware that I first took some pains to define "truth" and "Truth" and only then applied that sentence, right?
Do note that, in this sentence, the claim is the lie:
"Any mechanism claiming to provide a truth with is closer to the Truth, other than Science, is lying."

From the basic assumption that things beyond our minds exist and they are measurable, then Science is the best mechanism to actually measure them, catalogue them, and reason out their relationships. In other words, it provides us with the best description of reality, hence the most truthful description of reality, the closest to the Truth that humanity is capable of.
From this, it naturally follows that any other mechanism is further from the Truth.
So the claim, by any other mechanism, that it is actually closer to the Truth than Science, must be false.

This is basic logic.

But, if I take the solipsist view, then what's the point of me typing all this? I might just be entertaining some ghost of my own mental construction.

" In other words, better not follow any form of faith-based system which is scientifically unverifiable."
Are you claiming you live purely by empirical evidence?

For the most part, yes.
However, for simplicity and mental sanity, I take many many many shortcuts.... some of them may be misleading me... but, overall, the system has been serving me well enough.