I'm not talking about truth as in things that are true.  I'm talking about the nature of "truth" as a metaphysical concept.

Come again.  You mean to tell me that there is a difference between something that is true and the "truth?"  I certainly missed that nuance as a child!

In fact, the MOST common way of "proving" something is true is to arrange a demonstration.  The legal profession even calls it "evidence."  And yes, if you are very fortunate, you can conduct a demonstration because it shuts up all doubters.

Didn't you ever wonder if a "logic" could somehow produce a trap that can make you believe something other than the evidence, that there just MIGHT be something wrong with the logic?  Is it possible that such a flawed logic might be popular because it allows folks to "win" debates even when the facts are not on their side.  

But the bigger point is that someone did indeed invent a better logic.  This logic works FAR better than the old kind because it can handle all the variations between long and short, strong or weak, fat and thin, etc.  This logic has utterly demolished its more primitive ancestors in the emotion-free world of computerized logic.  So isn't it possible that schools that charge money and hand out degrees in the old logic are knowingly misleading our children?


"Remember the I35W bridge--who needs terrorists when there are Republicans"