Skip to main content

What is meant by the Objective Conception of Truth? (Protagoras)

The objectivity of truth has been the focus of many philosophers, including Nietzche, Plato, and Kierkegaard. To better understand the "objective conception of truth," let's break down the phrase into its individual components. First, truth, or that which is factual. Conception of truth is referring to how we understand and think about truth. Finally, the term objective refers to that which is not dependent upon personal thoughts or experiences- things which are regardless of how we perceive them, or if we perceive them at all. With that, the objective conception of truth implies that is a factual truth which we can come to understand, but which exists regardless of our own perceptions. The opposite would be subjective truth, which may be different for many people because it is based on personal perceptions. 


The idea of objectivity has plagued numerous scholars because being human is a highly relative experience. For humans, no knowledge exists in a vacuum, safe from the taint of emotions or prior experience. Nonetheless, many philosophers and scientists seek to understand that which is objective in the world through rigorous thought and experimentation. For truth to be objective, it must be free of opinion or bias, and must be fixed in the sense that even if someone were not around to observe the truth, it would still be true. 


Protagoras was a fifth century philosopher from Greece who was quite in opposition to any concept of objective truth, though he was not necessarily subjective. Protagoras was one of the first thinkers to elaborate the idea of relativity, or that all "truth" exists in relation to the perceptions of an individual. For him, reality was understood based upon one's experiences in the world.


At the risk of simplifying too much, let's compare objectivity, subjectivity, and relativism in the following example. Imagine someone has been gifted a dozen roses for a special occasion. We could count the roses and objectively say that there are twelve. Regardless of whether or not someone is in the room to look at them, there are a dozen roses. Now, the person receiving the flowers thinks that roses are beautiful- this is a subjective feeling. We could ask, "Are they the most beautiful roses you've ever seen?" That person would have to consider whether these dozen roses, relative to others, are the most beautiful.


Protagoras was both relativist and agnostic, so it may be safe to say that he held suspicions on the objectivity of truth (there may well be an objective truth) but the human conception of this truth was entirely relative.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

A man has a garden measuring 84 meters by 56 meters. He divides it into the minimum number of square plots. What is the length of the square plots?

We wish to divide this man's garden into the minimum number of square plots possible. A square has all four sides with the same length.Our garden is a rectangle, so the answer is clearly not 1 square plot. If we choose the wrong length for our squares, we may end up with missing holes or we may not be able to fit our squares inside the garden. So we have 84 meters in one direction and 56 meters in the other direction. When we start dividing the garden in square plots, we are "filling" those lengths in their respective directions. At each direction, there must be an integer number of squares (otherwise, we get holes or we leave the garden), so that all the square plots fill up the garden nicely. Thus, our job here is to find the greatest common divisor of 84 and 56. For this, we prime factor both of them: `56 = 2*2*2*7` `84 = 2*2*3*7` We can see that the prime factors and multiplicities in common are `2*2*7 = 28` . This is the desired length of the square plots. If you wi...
Post a Comment
Read more

What warning does Chuchundra issue to Rikki?

Chuchundra, the sniveling, fearful muskrat who creeps around walls because he is too terrified to go into the center of a room, meets Rikki in the middle of the night. He insults Rikki by begging him not to kill him. He then insults him by suggesting that Nag might mistake Chuchundra for Rikki. He says, "Those who kill snakes get killed by snakes."  He issues this warning to Rikki not to help keep Rikki safe but as a way of explaining why Rikki's presence gives him, Chuchundra, more reason to fear.  Chuchundra starts to tell Rikki what Chua the rat told him--but breaks it off when he realizes he might be overheard by Nag. He says, "Nag is everywhere, Rikki-Tikki." Rikki threatens to bite Chuchundra to get him to talk. Even then, Chuchundra won't overtly reveal any information. But he does say, "Can't you hear, Rikki-Tikki?" This is enough of a clue for the clever mongoose. He listens carefully and can just make out the "faintest scratch-s...
Post a Comment
Read more