Just because something hurt your feelings doesn’t make it trolling.
Truths and Lies exist.
You need to exist to claim that you don’t exist and you are a liar if you claim otherwise.
This is foundational in philosophy.
But this is not the Truth.
Why are they ‘apparently not’, exactly?
If there is a ‘hierarchy’ of ‘truth’, then there is really only two.
One I denote as ‘Truth’, and one as ‘truth’.
‘Truth’ is ‘that’, which everyone could agree with and accept, and, ‘truth’ is ‘that’, which only some agree with and accept.
The ‘hierarchy’ here is, ‘Truth’ is important, whereas ‘truth’ is unimportant and not even worth repeating nor sharing.
Which is like ‘arguments’. Either they are sound and valid, and thus are important and best shared and repeated, or they are not sound and valid and really are useless, except when presented as example of how to not formulate arguments properly and Correctly.
.
My duality.. 
Corporeal / surreal.. 
..6 / 7 
There is only ‘the Truth’, which everyone could agree with and accept, and therefore is irrefutable, and, ‘people’s own personal truth’, which is not what everyone could agree with and accept, and is refutable.
Once others also learn how to distinguish between the two, then ‘the world’ can actually start to become a much better place for everyone.
That statement is too reductive. In philosophical terms, truth is not usually defined as ‘what everyone can agree on’, but rather as correspondence with facts, coherence within a system, or another criterion depending on the theory of truth.
The phrase ‘people’s own personal truth’ is particularly unclear. While a person can have a sincere perspective, lived experience or interpretation, this does not make a claim true in the same way that a factual claim is true. A statement can be meaningful to someone and still be false or incomplete.
Furthermore, the statement confuses two different questions: whether a claim is true, and whether people will accept it. Agreement is a social outcome, while truth is a philosophical status. The two can overlap, but they are not identical.
A more accurate formulation would be that there are objective claims that can be true or false independently of personal preference, and subjective experiences that are real even if they cannot be universally recognised as facts. This preserves the validity of personal perspectives without reducing truth to consensus or individual feelings.
Your formulation oversimplifies the distinction between fact, interpretation, and lived experience.
In relation to ‘what’, exactly?
In any term, I do not know of the word ‘truth’ ever being defined in ‘that way’.
But, let ‘us’ not forget, that you human beings in the days when this is being written are still looking and searching for the Truth and the answers, in Life.
And, a huge reason why people like ‘you’ still are searching is due to the Fact of the Wrong way that you people have been defining and using words.
Truth, like what is Right in Life, at the most fundamental level, is found in ‘agreement’.
This is just a Factual Truth that has only just started coming to light and being fully understood.
And, yet you people still fight, argue, and disagree over what is actually true or not.
Imagine looking at what has been done, and keep doing that, while hoping or expecting different outcomes.
Also, here ‘we’ have another one who goes to ‘theory’ for advice or guidance in Life. When will ‘they’ ever learn?
Okay.
What makes a ‘factual claim’ actually true?
Of course, but so what?
Even furthermore, what the words, ‘the statement’ is referring to, exactly, is not clear.
What do the words, ‘the statement’, refer to, exactly?
I have informed you already.
If a claim can be agreed upon and accepted by all, then it is a Truth, which is distinguished from just a truth, which only some could agree with and accept.
Also, if anyone wants to learn and know what is actually not just True but also Right, in Life, ‘this way’ is how they are known, for sure.
Here is another typical type of response used in philosophical forums or philosophical discussions. People would use the ‘philosophical’ word as though that made their claim more true or more correct somehow.
Now, what even is a so-called ‘philosophical status’, exactly?
And, if you have enough interest and curiosity, and are open and honest enough, then you will also come to see and learn how it is through ‘agreement’ that what is Right and Truth is life is uncovered. and revealed.
And, if you even ‘try to’ use ‘argumentum ad populum’ you really have not been listening and hearing me here.
Who cares? They certainly do not relate to what I have been pointing out and meaning.
An even more Accurate formulation is, if a claim is True, then it is a subjective and objective claim, and, if a claim is true, then it is a subjective claim, only.
Once more, ‘true’ relates to ‘that’, which cannot be agreed upon and accepted by everyone, whereas ‘True’ relates to ‘that’, which can be agreed upon and accepted by everyone.
Will you provide examples of how this works in relation to everyone?
If no, why not?
Is this an objective claim that is irrefutably True, or just your own personal opinion or belief?
Talk about ‘trying to’ overcomplicating what is absolutely certainly not.
What everyone could agree with and accept, is ‘the Truth’, which is something that could not be refuted, or objectively True.
What everyone could not agree with and accept, is ‘the truth’, which is something that only some agree with and accept, but which can be refuted. This truth is what is sometimes referred to as subjectively true, also.
How much simpler could this ‘hierarchy of truths’ get?
You obviously prefer black/white solutions and ignore the aspects of life that do not fit into that dichotomy.
Philosophers such as Aristotle and Kant have also emphasised the importance of correspondence between thought and reality, while acknowledging the complexities and limitations of defining truth strictly in formal or nominal terms.
Karl Jaspers expanded the concept of truth beyond empirical verification, proposing that ultimate truth encompasses faith, transcendence and deeply personal experience. He championed openness, philosophical dialogue and the recognition of diverse perspectives as being essential for coexistence. His notion of philosophical faith and the willingness to engage in dialogue and respect diversity, present a pathway towards harmonious living.
In Eastern philosophical traditions, truth is explored as a quest to perceive the reality underlying illusions, recognise the unity among all beings and discover the divine essence within each individual. These traditions often teach that societies can foster acceptance and peaceful coexistence by acknowledging certain objective truths, such as the universality of suffering and the necessity of compassion.
A central concept in both Western and Eastern philosophy is that of the transcendentals: universal properties of being, with truth, goodness, beauty and unity being the most prominent. First proposed by ancient and medieval thinkers such as Aquinas, Aristotle, Plato and Augustine, the transcendentals are considered to be attributes that permeate all existence. They transcend individual circumstances, acting as foundational threads that unite everything that exists.
Crucially, the transcendentals are viewed as both objective and universal, independent of personal opinions or cultural boundaries. Wherever there is existence, there is inevitably some aspect of truth, goodness, beauty and unity; these qualities coexist as fundamental aspects of existence. Philosophers emphasise the deep interrelationship between the transcendentals: the pursuit of truth enables us to understand reality; the pursuit of goodness guides ethical living; and the appreciation of beauty gives meaning to our experiences. Together, they provide a flexible yet powerful framework for dialogue, shared values and coexistence.
Aquinas and other medieval philosophers contended that the transcendentals are inseparable: ‘Where there is truth, there is also goodness and unity’, reminding us that these universal properties are inherently intertwined.
By acknowledging the transcendentals as universal attributes of being, philosophy suggests that the shared pursuit of truth, goodness and beauty can form a basis for acceptance and coexistence. Rather than being merely personal preferences, these qualities offer common ground that can unite humanity at its deepest level and allow for meaningful understanding between diverse perspectives.
While individuals may hold personal truths, many philosophical traditions teach that there are basic, universal truths about reality, existence, and our shared condition that provide the groundwork for coexistence. Openness, dialogue and the earnest search for understanding are vital in this process.
This is a completely False belief and claim of yours here. To make it absolutely clear I do not prefer and ignore what “bob” claimed here.
Every young child is born a “philosopher”, so there is no need to mention anyone’s name as one, as though being one is somehow different or special.
Those two just human beings also, obviously, did not teach how to find the actual irrefutable Truths in Life. So, what they said in their attempts to justify why they could not find and differentiate ‘the Truth’ from ‘the truth’. They both also obviously did not explain how to know, for sure, when one has obtained the objective Truth, so they really are not the best ones to use as examples here
Who cares?
What that one said is also not something everyone could agree with accept, and so is not the actual ultimate irrefutable objective Truth anyway.
Who cares? Obviously what that one said has not worked.
Someone has started and/or devoted a thread to ‘me’ and my more or less exact same views or claims about how actual Peace and Harmony WILL come about.
you can repeat what some human beings gave said for as long as you like, but remember nothing said so far has led to creating World Peace. So, there must be ‘another way’.
And, once you, also, know how to find the actual Truths in Life, then you too will also come to learn and know how to create Unity and live in Peace and Harmony with every one, as One.
What you say about basic, universal truths about reality, existence, and ‘our’ shared condition that provide the groundwork for coexistence I just call the ‘Truth’.
Talk about not recognising and noticing the simplicity, existing within a confused and completely unnecessary complex perception.
Again, if you learn how to find and recognise the Truth, from the truth, then it will be much easier and simpler for you to also learn how to live with everyone in a Truly Peaceful and Harmonious world.
All if this is really very simple and easy, actually.
“greenfuse” does not focus on ‘the words’.
Who cares? You see, others can do it too. You’ll be on “ignore” from now on.
So, this one does not care when it holds completely False beliefs and makes completely False claims.
And, LOL they wondered why they were still looking for answers and still searching for the Truth.
By all means, “run away” and hide.
They come here and make claims but when shown they are Wrong or False they cannot just acknowledge and admit this.