Are reality and truth the same thing

This is an interesting point to bring up
I agree with illativemindindeed when he said in another thread “Truth is a human conception, therefore limiting any truth to the human realm”
In addition to the whole truth being human thing, I thought, maybe truth is an extension of the phycology of people who think like this
“God created us, and he dosent appear to keep tabs on any other species, so we must be important”
“Out of all the life we are aware of, nothing is as intelligent as us, so in this solar system, we are the most important and valuable life”
Or just plain pre conceptions that we are important that dosent really surface obviously
I am tempted to even say the theory of geo centricism, the theory that the earth is at the centre of the universe, is, regardless of whether we know now we are not, is still a example that humans are capable of thinking in such a self centred way.
I call it self centred, but really, if we suppose evolution is right, it must be deep rooted in the human phyce that we are important, because if there was no one that thought like this, obviously or not, we would all believe we were in significant, and perhaps wouldnt bother trying to survive.
But on the other side of the scale, isint the very nature of truth and common descriptions of truth that truth some how penetrates all perception, and is the real deal, cuts all the crap that us humans cane sometimes foolishly think are correect.

After weighing up these arguments I am beggining to think the whole concept of truth is paradoxial (if there is such a word)
Humans came up with the word truth, or at least the idea of truth is deep rooted in our phycology permanently.
BUUUUUUUUUUUUUUT, the definition of truth that is most accepted is that truth is some sort of thing that exists independant of all the pitfalls of perception and is the ultimate reality in a sense. These two things are fact, and they co incide, so maybe there isint even an argument.

I am also aware I just used the word real, or a form of it, in the last couple of sentances. And this seems to support another opinion that is perhaps easier to comprehend. In the common use of the word true, and real, we tend to be describing an event or an object.
Take for example someone said “Honestly, Im telling the truth, it really did happen”
This sentance tells us that firstly, we commonly accosiate the word truth when we are trying to say that something actually happened, and real (if the person disagrees)
If the people that created the idea of truth we using the two words in the same sort of context, which I can assume they would be in every day situations that arent extra ordinary, then this argument shouldnt even exist, because if they would be using the two words in this context (which they would be, because stuff would be happening as the humans that created the concept of truth should of been very early in our existance, would be contantly relaying events as they would be discovering stuff in their enviroment, for example “there was this really bright light, and it heated that meat, and when I ate it, it tasted better” <----discovery of fire)they would of been creating the concept of reality and truth simaltaneously.

Which theory do we prefer guys, I am split between illativemindindeed’s idea that the concept of truth was human and the one I just explained (hopefully in a clear way) about the idea of truth and reality being created at the same time, which would beg the question, before we determine truth, is anything real in a conscious-less uiniverse ?

i suppose it would still exist but it just wouldnt be acknowledged by anything existing in it .
as for truth , it is merely a word we created to back up our claims - e.g ‘’ i swear i’m telling the truth ‘’ - here it is used to back up something is correct and as described . truth is an idea more than anything .

Truth is the main quality of reality, as opposed to a ‘fake reality’, which would be a lie to our senses. Reality, however, cannot be said to be constant to everybody. Every different human being interprets reality differently.

Let me give an example. I have heard, on occasion, that two different people will perceive a color differently. Person A sees the color green as ‘green’. Person B, however, will see the color green as person A sees ‘red’. Which is true? None. Person A assigned a particular tone ‘green’ to that which is green. Person B, in his own attempt to interpret ‘reality’, assigned the color ‘red’ to that which person A sees as ‘green’. The only thing that may be called truth is that the particular light wave entering their eyes had the same frequency (suppose 4400hz) and that they both call it ‘green’. THAT is the closest we can get to ‘reality’. But what does 4400hz mean to us in terms of a tone or color we see? Nothing at all. That’s why we assign a color to that, so that we can recognize it as green.

In the same way that reality cannot be observed directly, truth cannot be observed directly either. Thus, two people claiming to be telling the truth (assume they are being truthful) might have opposing viewpoints, because they perceive reality differently. One of these two people may call the other ‘ignorant’ because of this (and viceversa). But the truth is that they are both, in a sense, ignorant.

Why do I always get scnockered to the gills and try to post rationally…Truth is our method of conceiving of reality, but it is never exact…No form ever is, unless accidentally so…

Truth should just mean, “when something posesses the criteria to suit the agreed upon standard of evidence in a given time or place”.

Reality should be defined as anything conceivable, possible, existing or not.

When we get done examining things, we’d like to call the ones true which give us the happiest feelings. This is where things get messy.

If you say that if it is not conceivable, by which you mean, I guess that by today;s standards it has not be conceived then it is not real; I would have to disagree…Reality is an infinite, but we certainly presume that all we cannot conceive of will at some point be conceivable…
Truth is how well our actual conceptions measure up against the reality we are trying to conceive of…It is a simple standard or accuracy…

Truth: “a fact that has been verified”
Reality: “all of your experiences that determine how things appear to yo”

I suppose they are related, but if they’re the same thing is debatable.

truth is just a word we use to explain an understanding that a certain proposition or fact obtains, as opposed to not obtaining. if it IS THE CASE that x, then x is true-- such as “it is the case that i am alive”. if we want to think objectively, then “truth” would just be the existent propositions or facts which obtain at any moment.

but then, this is just our concept of reality. reality is a concept that we use to encompass the idea of EXISTENCE, independent of our subjective perception. that there IS something, regardless of what it may be, is what we deem ‘reality’. of course we always debate WHAT is reality or what are its characteristics, but regardless of our misunderstandings of what it might or might not be, reality is just THAT WHICH EXISTS. it could indeed be similar to “truth” as a summation of all individual or lesser truths which comprise the whole.

so they are very similar, and one necessarily implies the other (you cannot have a true x without x being a part of reality, just as x cannot be part of reality without x being a truth), but there is a difference, which just lies in HOW we typically use the concept lingustically. ‘truth’ seems to often be used to denote individual, or lesser instantiations of facts and propositions, whereas ‘reality’ usually describes the SUM or totality of these truths, which obtain at any given moment regardless of human perception or knowledge.

Does truth come from reality, or vice versa?

It is a good question, because we can only grasp reality as we conceive of it, but it is reality none the less, and the conception must meet at some point as truth, the reality that is conceived… We can conceive of the sky as blue… Then the sky should be blue, but we know that situation is forever in flux, so what we say of this moment and this reality has only an immediate meaning…In fact I have seen days where there was no sky and grey mist hung about my head like a wet blanket… What truth then would serve so well as a curse??? Some realities are beyond conception, definition, or description… How might we draw a line between our inner pain an our outer reality??? Just as a blue sky day can lift our spirits to the heavens, so we know that it is hard to say where IT leaves off, and we begin…So truth is an approximation of reality…

Experience? No, moreover what we assume it would be. Maybe even what we’d like this line to be.

Try as we might, we cannot have a fully objective idea of reality or of truth…Our lives attach a certain meaning, which is to say, value to all of reality, and all of truth, so that correctly we do not draw a bold line between ourselves and reality, and I think if we are honest, we don’t even try… If I can put it another way: we are truth, and nothing has to be more true to us than it supports our lives… Clearly, humanity can change reality to an extent, but never without first changing our perception of truth, so, if we do not like reality, and who does, the key to the problem is a very fluid sense of truth, and one that is not in the least absolute…

Which problem are you specifically referring to?

Which problem are you specifically referring to?
[/quote]
The problem presented of telling the difference between truth and reality… We are hardly neutral…

Well if we do not know, then we must be neutral.

If our lives depend upon knowing the truth, how can we be neutral??? And if we must decide our lives against the lives of others how can we pretend to be disinterested…

Neutral because we are unaware.

Supid because unaware…Never neutral…

I suppose you meant stupid? If so, why all of a sudden stupid?

Thank you…I did mean stupid, which I was after a long day and a late night…

We are more or less aware… We are never free of prejudice on the notions of truth v reality, because we are a part of both… It is like asking a fat girl to guess her own weight…You stand a better chance of getting your butt kicked than getting an accurate answer…