Less Than Nothing

Is truth an achievable goal to strive for? We humans often take it for granted that the truth exists somewhere, that if two individuals disagree, one must be 'right' and the other 'wrong', in other words, that one person understands the objective truth, and the other is misguided, or basing their beliefs on flawed logic or incorrect facts. The issue with accepting this view of reality, is that it requires first accepting that absolute facts exist, statements which are incontrovertibly true.  The question stands that if an objective truth exists, why haven't we found it yet? Even after 25,000 years of human  civilization, there is not a single fact that humans can agree on, with hundreds of vastly differing systems of thought on the basic nature of our existence. If absolute truths did exist, facts which could stand up to any scrutiny and could be proved beyond a modicum of doubt, would we not have found them yet? Should there not be a single axiom which cannot be co...

In an age shaped by massive scientific advancement, absolute empirical examination is seen as a standard to be strived for. In an era where so many traditional beliefs and practices are torn apart by rigorous testing, general skepticism is the norm in science and philosophy. This development is undoubtably a good one, humans must base their actions on knowledge which has been proved irrevocably by the most effective methods possible. Objectivity is the only way to truly understand. A core practice of the scientific method is not to take traditionally held knowledge for granted, to examine for oneself every aspect of one's knowledge in order to prove an airtight understanding, it is massively important in any form of education to base one's knowledge on fundamental truths we can prove for ourselves rather than taking at face value, information which is provided by others, no matter how important this knowledge may be in the collective cultural memory, tradition is no substitute ...