The Perception of Reality and Truth by People

Truth, the property of sentences, assertions, beliefs, thoughts, or propositions in metaphysics and philosophy are said to agree with the facts or state what is the case in normal discourse. Truth is the object of the belief; logical error is a mistake. Individuals need to endure the reality of the world. Knowing the truth is critical. Believing that which is not true will ruin a person's plans and may even cost him his life. To say what is not true can lead to legal and social penalties. By contrast, a dedicated pursuit of truth characterizes the good scientist, the good historian, and the good detective.

So what is the truth, should it be so gravitational and so central in people's lives? They are various ways truth can be obtained or found but I’m going to limit myself to just two, objective and subjective truth. What is subjective truth? Subjective truth is the kind of truth that is derived from views or opinions. What is the objective truth? This truth is based on facts or things are generally accepted. Truth, like reality, is shaped by an individual's values, thoughts, expectations, and emotions. Nevertheless, truth and reality are not the same things. Reality is the world we live in, while the truth is the thing that helps people mold their reality. For the existence of reality, facts are widely accepted as true. A person can’t live a life without some kind of truth in their lives. Only if there is no truth - a false fact that can’t exist, there is deception.

Everyone has a sense of what they believe to be true. Since everyone can’t interpret facts objectively, it can only be assumed that truth is subjective. There are things that everyone can agree to be true, such as the idea that we are born, that we are alive, and that we will die. But aside from that, several different things can be argued to be true such as the idea of heaven and hell, whether there is life outside of Earth, and so on. So by that thought, the truth cannot be viewed as something objective. For something to be objective, everyone must agree on it. If there's a person who thinks otherwise, he must be considered subjective. Truth is the idea that people know that it's true based on their concepts, though not everyone agrees with them, their ideas, their experiences, the knowledge, and their emotions. Human nature needs to adapt physically or socially to its environment.

People constantly redefine definitions that are seen as true, so it's wrong to say the reality is purely factual. This doesn't mean that all we think is true should not be challenged. Rather, the invitation to our agreed truths is an invitation by philosophies and facts. It doesn't mean you're wrong simply because one says something is wrong with you. It is in our nature as humans that we constantly define ourselves and what is right and wrong. It is in our best interest not to judge others by what we believe to be true but to understand different viewpoints. We must be open to other people's thoughts to expand and understand the different ways we can view the world.

'Human Nature Redux' is an essay by David Brooks from the New York Times on nature. Two claims are being made against human nature. Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau made the two points. Rousseau claims that people are born free, but that society is connected. As a result, he argues that culture corrupts people. Hobbes, on the other hand, argues that people are naturally born evil and that for civilizing people a third party is required. The idea of' you versus me,' which Hobbes sees human nature as a competition. Man is kept in line with the creation of a progressive society by having a third party like the government. The argument that we seek to interpret here, what is the core of human nature? Brooks and Hobbes's sides. He states, 'Humans are struggling for hegemony and rejecting progressive egalitarian dreams.' Moreover, he says, 'this is based on the idea that there is a universal human nature; that it has nasty, competitive elements about which we do not understand much about, and that the conventions and institutions that have evolved prevent us from slitting each other's throats are valuable and altered at great risk.' I don't see why it matters, personally.

Whether Rousseau or Hobbes is right, I do not think it makes a difference. I believe it can be argued that both are correct. The government could manipulate the people, Rousseau has a point. Hobbes can, however, be claimed that today’s state prevents people from doing bad things by sending wrongdoers to jails in society. All sides can be seen clearly by looking at various historical examples. The irony of human nature is that people can't live without society, and society can't survive without men. Human nature has its own flaws, but culture is the same. Society and man must work together to find a happy medium that prevents society. In this logic, rather than in stones, we look for facts. As people, we are adaptive entities. His perception of reality and truth are continually influenced every day. It is wrong to say that we are living in a world in which reality is laid in stone. One thought the world was flat at one point.

However, when someone realized the world was round, the truth was adapted by the person. So I agree that there are truth and truth can be found through experience, for example, we were told that if we put our hand in the fire it will burn even though it is something that is proven, we can also acquire this knowledge through personal experience, that is actually putting our hand in the fire to find out whether it actually burns or not, or someone told you if you cheat in a test you are going to visit disciplinary panel. This is generally known but someone can also get this knowledge by actually cheating and when the person gets caught the person is OUT!!!, now the knowledge has been derived and the information is clearer to him and everyone based on that one person’s experience.