The Conflict of Opinions and the Emergence of Truth

Extract

[...] Does the conflict of opinions hinder the truth? It is certain that we commonly say: to each their own truth. This is a common opinion, a received idea that seems indisputable. It could even be presented as the mark of an open mind. Nevertheless, philosophical reflection cannot accept such an opinion without examination. Indeed, what becomes of the Truth that philosophy seeks if there are ultimately as many "truths" as there are individuals, and if these "truths" can contradict each other? [...]

[...] In the case of universal truths, such as mathematical and scientific truths, the existence of multiple opinions and therefore the 'subjectivity' of these truths constructed by this or that man, does not exclude the universal character: the conflict of opinions does not pose an obstacle when it is mastered rationally and leads to a common ground. Also, accepting the conflict of opinions comes to accepting the quest for Truth. Indeed, just as men, in the myth of the Cave, fear having to leave a cave of which they are not aware that it is a true prison, the conflict of opinions leads to leaving one's own and proper opinion to face reality and to extract the common Truth of all men. [...]

[...] However, we will also question the need to confront contradictory opinions and a plural truth in the quest for Truth. Finally, we will attempt to answer the following problem: What is the real meaning of Truth? Firstly, the conflict of opinions hinders the truth because it is a constant manifestation of the questioning of universal truths. Among these, we can find mathematical truths. For example, the mathematician cannot accept the statement 'Everyone has their own truth (mathematical)'. In fact, a mathematical proposition is said to be true when it is demonstrated, that is, logically deduced from other previously demonstrated propositions, called 'theorems', or primary propositions, called 'postulates'. [...]

[...] We then understand that scientific laws are not true for one researcher and false for another. In addition, the conflict of opinions does not always hinder the truth but on the contrary, advances towards the truth by somehow unraveling the 'true from the false'. In book VII of The Republic, Plato has his master Socrates speak, who presents 'the state of our nature with respect to knowledge and ignorance' through a famous comparison, 'the Allegory of the Cave'. Let us imagine men who have always been prisoners at the bottom of a Cave, chained in such a way that they have never seen anything but 'shadows' on a wall. [...]

[...] But if he gradually comes to perceive 'reality', he will understand that the Cave is a place of illusions and will prefer his new condition to the one he left. If he descends back into the darkness, his dazzled eyes will no longer see these shadows clearly, of which he now knows that they are only shadows. But people will mock his clumsiness, and no one will accept being freed by him to go to a place from which one returns blind. [...]