Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (28113)	1/15/1999 9:49:00 AM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

TP, I can't argue with the semantics of truth as you define them. However, I am asking you to consider the other definitions of truth. Many believe there are eternal truths that are not relative or subject to perspective and evidence. These involve personal validation at the heart felt level. Its so personal that we can not even judge what is in anothers hearts. Hence, when perspective is applied you cannot even come up with an applied example that everyone agrees with. That doesn't eradicate the principle of truth. To intentionally deceive others is an example of applying falsehood. The only judgement on that is evidentiary. You can't see a falsehood. You can't judge what is in someone else's heart, but you can and should judge behavior that violates rules of justice in a society; or, the society looses its ability to identify standards and call on its members to adhere to them.