TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Get Offended From:"Alan D. Miller" <"Alan D. Miller"@educate.com> To:techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com Date:Mon, 1 May 2000 09:03:44 -0400
<<First, truth is sometimes inappropriate, because "truth" isn't objective,
but subjective. Truth is, like all other conclusions, a statement based on
perception.>>
Parmenedes of Ela (circa 500 BCE) argued exactly the opposite. It was his
contention that what we perceive is not truth, but truth filtered through our
perceptions. We can only perceive reality, but there exists an ideal (truth)
behind reality that we cannot perceive directly; we can only think of it. Some
2500 years later modern physics bears this out. We cannot directly perceive the
structure of the atom, for example; but we can do some experimenting, think
about it, and figure out the underlying truth of it. (Or at least a truth that
explains the observed behavior of atoms in our reality.) I conclude from this
(your conclusions are your own, and may not be truth <G>) that truth _is_
objective. Our perceptions of it are subjective and flawed. This does not mean
that we cannot know truth. It only means that we have to recognize our biases
and try to think through them to the underlying truth. After all, we did figure
out the Second Law of Thermodynamics, didn't we?
Just my dollar-two-ninety-eight.
Al Miller
alan -dot- miller -at- educate -dot- com
