"There is no truth. There is only perception."?

Question

-Gustave Flaubert

whats your opinion on it?

Answer 1

TRUTH is always there,,,,,,,,, inside our hearts...


...

Answer 2

Humans are fallible so this error could be said to exist as an additive property to reason and observation, both of which are used in perception. This would mean there is some probability of difference between the hypothetical truth and what we perceive or conceive. I think this is a better explanation than There is no truth. There is only perception."

There is another which is logic based and this can exist because of definition. Deduction but not induction can be known outside of error. You have the concept of a circle and it can exist in your mind and this thought can be perfect. It contains the germ of truth.

Answer 3

If "There is no truth. There is only perception." is right, then that would mean it is itself a Truth.
Consider 1. "There is no truth."
If the above statement is true, that is, that NOTHING is true, then it itself is a paradox (see."The Liar's Paradox",ect.) because essentially it is asserting a true claim in the midst of denying truth. It is the equivalent of stating: I am a dog & I am not a dog.Or/ This shape has four sides, and it does not have four sides. This seems to hold true so long as it is taken literally-however, maybe it was meant to be taken metaphorically: as in, we can never really know the actual truth, only the truth as it appears to our senses.

Answer 4

He has a point, but I don't agree. We could not do science without widespread agreement on what constitutes truth, and how to find it. Suppose that you study quantum electrodynamics, and calculate a gyromagnetic ratio. You then do an experiment, and find that the experimental results agree with your calculated result within experimental error, and the possible error is less than one part in a trillion. Shall you conclude that you have found some truth? I would.

Answer 5

Can't prove or disprove something like that. Even Heisenberg's uncertainty principle leaves the door open for some extra-dimensional reality that can be measured more precisely than our three-dimensional world. Personally, I believe there is an absolute reality that is hidden behind layers of perception that physicists have yet to peel away.

Answer 6

So true. Diiferent history books contain different accounts of the same events. Wars have been fought and millions have been killed as to what is true and what is not.

My opinion is that ulitmately its up to the indiviual be critical, weigh all evidences carefully to even approximate to what can be called the truth.

Answer 7

This is a logically contradictory statement, ironic I might add. Implicit is the assumption that truth can't be absolute and definitive and, yet, this statement has the tone of authority and sounds very sure of it. It's tantamount to me writing this statement: I can't write sentences in English. Very foolish statement....

Answer 8

Perception at any one time is one person's 'truth' at that time, which may change or transform, at a dif time, to another perception or 'truth', (is that maturity in time?)....

;)

Answer 9

It's ridiculous. There is truth, there is perception. Sometimes perception is truth and sometimes not. I am...that is truth.

Answer 10

i like it! and its true. im trying to think of seemingly objective things to refute this satement with and i cant. Example: "this ball is red." if the ball is red, you'd think its the truth...BUT it all has to do with perception bc someone who is color blind would perceive it otherwise.
i LOVE this quote!

Answer 11

I have to disagree. If there is no truth, only perception, than what terrorists did was okay, because they perceived it to be. Or what a murderer does is fine, because they perceive it to be.