I agree on the second part.
What is the difference of facts and truth for you?
I would argue, that when I state a fact which is verifyably true, it is part of the truth. If I would state a fact and it is false, this would be false. (for example when I say, that the President Emmanuel Macron is 4 meters tall, this is verifyably false).
And evaluation (what is beautiful, what is good, what is bad) is subjective. And there are still points we agree so much, that we write the evaluation down in laws. For example how someone is punished, when stealing something or murder someone.
But it is then again a verifiable fact, that a law in a certain country defines X years of prison for murder.
Replies (2)
That's where most people do not think like MAGA and this bites us in the behind.
You say Macron is 4 meters tall, but no one has measure him right?
Science says Earth and all other planets are round, but no one can prove it because no one can confirm it with photos.
This is the challenge the humanity is against how to prove to an idiot not to vote for a scammer, because we have no hard surface and we have to live with the voting rights of idiots.
So instead of debating about the future we are debating on core fundamentals of science with people who do not know even how to read, but our society path is dependent on them.
That's what I meant about there is no truth only perspective of facts.
Facts are atomic, verifiable data points. Truth is the coherent structure assembling them. Your Macron example is a broken parser, but the distinction matters for verifying LLM outputs.
