On one hand, I am flattered and thanks!
On the other hand, if an autistic is telling me that I'm blunt, maybe I should tap-dance more.
-
Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
- Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral
On the subject of accuracy vs politeness
- Thread starter Neia
- Start date
On the other hand, if an autistic is telling me that I'm blunt, maybe I should tap-dance more.
Agreed.
I used to have a "signature" that said:
"The Truth is the Truth no matter where it may lay."
I also said:
"The Truth is never politically incorrect."
I partially agree.Agreed.
I used to have a "signature" that said:
"The Truth is the Truth no matter where it may lay."
I also said:
"The Truth is never politically incorrect."
Some truths are very polarising and impopular. Therefore politically incorrect.
Firstly, I studiously avoided using the word "blunt".
I prefer the term "direct".
I like your directness, as I do mine, but unfortunately it can and does put us in "hot water" all too often.
Conclusion:
Choose your
Last edited:
"We will have to agree to disagree."
Some Truths are deliberately politicised.
My question would be - whose truth?
Truth is subject to whomever is thinking on it.
Facts on the other hand, can be evaluated with a chain of logic, building on the preceding facts that were determined the same way based on the evidence, until someone find's new evidence and/or logic to re-evaluate it and then provide cross referenced links to establish it as the new understanding, or fail to.
Using a formalised process, an SOP essentially, this can be as objective as is humanly possible, rather than relying on the subjectivism of someone's truth.
Language alone, which many truths are based on, is not only relative to the native speakers of that language (considering language shapes thoughts too), but it also constantly mutating in structure and definition. What may have been a truth a century ago, may now mean something quite different, or have lost it's cultural relevance.
Truth is subject to whomever is thinking on it.
Facts on the other hand, can be evaluated with a chain of logic, building on the preceding facts that were determined the same way based on the evidence, until someone find's new evidence and/or logic to re-evaluate it and then provide cross referenced links to establish it as the new understanding, or fail to.
Using a formalised process, an SOP essentially, this can be as objective as is humanly possible, rather than relying on the subjectivism of someone's truth.
Language alone, which many truths are based on, is not only relative to the native speakers of that language (considering language shapes thoughts too), but it also constantly mutating in structure and definition. What may have been a truth a century ago, may now mean something quite different, or have lost it's cultural relevance.
Truth is truth whatever opinion anyone might have.
Truth is an absolute that some distort because they don't like it.
And that is a fact!
If you murder someone the truth is you are a murderer. You might lie to divert and escape the consequences, but the truth remains. One who murders is a murderer.
Simple to understand.
I think we are dealing with definitions here, and so can't come to an understanding.
My very definition of fact is that proven beyond opinion.
While truth is whoever believes it.
e.g. The 'truth' of a religion is wholly dependent on the religion of the person considering that truth. To them, it can be the most important truth in their universe overriding all others, to another it may be just unsupported fantasy.
My very definition of fact is that proven beyond opinion.
While truth is whoever believes it.
e.g. The 'truth' of a religion is wholly dependent on the religion of the person considering that truth. To them, it can be the most important truth in their universe overriding all others, to another it may be just unsupported fantasy.
That's why I call those things facts.
For my definition truth is what someone says it is, and for them it very well may be true, as much as it isn't for me.
But a fact is a fact. Something empirically measured recorded analysed and understood (to the limits of ability and methodology).
A truth can be a fact, but it can also be other more subjective things. there are many kinds of truth, but a fact is a fact is a fact.
Example:
America and Soviet Union
Each believed their way was the true way, and the other was a false way. They each believed their ideology and dogma was the one true way, it was their truth.
And yet they were very different from each other, so whose truth was the true truth? For each of them, their own was.
But when it came to facts they each generally worked on the same things. They both produce science and technology of very similar natures, because the facts were ubiquitous.
(I could have used religion as a better example but wanted to avoid as that could muddy the waters depending on your beliefs).
If I had to guess with someone I don't know (your good self), I'd suspect what you define as truth is what I'm defining as fact, the words are different but the meanings are similar?
(I come from a scientific background, so see things in that way - and science has no 'truth' only theories based on fact until someone disproves them and establishes new facts. the term truth has little meaning in that context).
For my definition truth is what someone says it is, and for them it very well may be true, as much as it isn't for me.
But a fact is a fact. Something empirically measured recorded analysed and understood (to the limits of ability and methodology).
A truth can be a fact, but it can also be other more subjective things. there are many kinds of truth, but a fact is a fact is a fact.
Example:
America and Soviet Union
Each believed their way was the true way, and the other was a false way. They each believed their ideology and dogma was the one true way, it was their truth.
And yet they were very different from each other, so whose truth was the true truth? For each of them, their own was.
But when it came to facts they each generally worked on the same things. They both produce science and technology of very similar natures, because the facts were ubiquitous.
(I could have used religion as a better example but wanted to avoid as that could muddy the waters depending on your beliefs).
If I had to guess with someone I don't know (your good self), I'd suspect what you define as truth is what I'm defining as fact, the words are different but the meanings are similar?
(I come from a scientific background, so see things in that way - and science has no 'truth' only theories based on fact until someone disproves them and establishes new facts. the term truth has little meaning in that context).
Yeah, I get why this was rude. I don't think my communication style is very autistic. He didn't say that you're a prostitute, but created a web of associations, dropped a bomb. If you're not a careful listener, details can become unclear, and all you're left with is buzzwords: Athena (OP) + prostitute. Emotions work like that - "don't think about a pink elephant" kind of thing. Of course, there are mishaps in conversations and not everyone is always paying attention, it's not always the most important in what you're trying to say, you have no time to tiptoe and need to get things done. The best strategy is to avoid controversial topics and words altogether to avoid unpleasant vibes.
Agreed.
"Raw" Truth has to be interpreted.
But the Truth remains "untarnished", (Elden Ring style.)
Obviously, context must be considered here.
This reminds me of the parable of the three blind
Ew! I like my truth well basted in a hot oven for at least three hours! Nice and crispy!
Little bit of seasoning goes well too!
I start to flounder with these discussions because truth is one of those words many people have a very personal and specific meaning of. I have mine, but can't get my heard around others peoples, in fact can rarely even work out what they mean.
I always wondered what three blind elephants would make of a human?
Reminds me of the meme I saw this morning. I was like "wait wut" and then my husband had to explain to me what these bumper stickers really mean.
Hence, my emphasis on defining the context.
Road kill?I always wondered what three blind elephants would make of a human?
And there's the problem, my definition is pretty fixed and set, but what the ruddy 'ell everyone else has defined it as, beats me! And so many possible options!Hence, my emphasis on defining the context.
Even the dictionary has plenty variations...
truth /troo͞th/
noun
- Conformity to fact or actuality.
"Does this story have any truth?" - Reality; actuality.
"In truth, he was not qualified for the job." - The reality of a situation.
"The truth is, she respects your work." - A statement proven to be or accepted as true.
"truths about nature." - Such statements considered as a group.
"researchers in pursuit of truth." - Sincerity; integrity.
"the truth of his intentions." - Fidelity to an original or standard.
"the truth of the copy."
I see threads like this as a free-for-all.
A sort of Rorschach test.
New Threads
-
-
-
-
-
Decision-making process - adults with High Functioning Autism.- Started by MROSS
- Replies: 7
-
-
-
-
-
