Truth is that which is observably and demonstrably true in reality. To be observably and/or demonstrably true is to be objectively true. Truth must be revealed by reality itself or it’s all in our mind. We have no other portal by which to base our understanding of objectivity. Even math, which is technically an abstract concept, isn’t possible to learn or even verify without a physical reality with which we can learn it. After all, all of math starts with our ability to count. If there’s nothing to count because we can’t see, touch, or hear anything, then what are we counting? If there’s no counting then we have no concept of numbers. If we have no numbers then by what metric are we doing math? Reality is the standard by which we measure the truth. Without reality, we literally couldn’t conceive of the concept of truth.
The opposite of objectivity is subjectivity. Subjectivity is the preferences, desires, biases, and so on that we have in the abstractions of our mind. While there’s nothing inherently wrong with having preferences, and other subjective biases as we all do, we must not mistake our preferences as possessing some degree of innate truth. While our subjective feelings towards a given subject or argument may turn out to be right, it’s not a reflection of the innate truth of our feelings. This is the false notion that truth is subjective.
If truth is subjective, as many today have claimed, then literally anything can be the truth. Afterall, all things subjective are purely at the whim of my emotional preferences. If anything can be true then everything can be true. And if everything can be true then nothing can be true. In a world where everything can be true, objectivity doesn’t exist. If I can call everything and/or nothing a unicorn, then the term unicorn doesn’t describe anything. Without a definition it becomes an entirely nonsensical word. The whole point to a definition is to exclude all possibilities with the exception of the one or more meanings found in the definition. If there’s no degree of specificity communicated by a word then it’s not communicating anything. Concepts only exist to the extent that we know how to define them.
If truth is subjective then I could legitimately claim that the greatest sentence ever written is the following: Unicorn unicorn unicorn unicorn, unicorn unicorn unicorn; unicorn unicorn, unicorn UNICORN!
If the truth isn’t based in reality, then there’s nothing to verify or demonstrate a deeper understanding or even a correct understanding of that truth. Truth becomes whatever we think whenever we think it. And if we don’t agree that truth exists then learning itself is a myth. If 2 + 2 doesn’t equal 4 but can equal any number, color, or spirit animal we want then learning itself is a pointless endeavor. If you believe in the objectivity of truth then the answer to literally every question, problem, and equation on planet Earth is whatever you want it to be.
But recognizing that truth exists is only the first step. We, as humans, can never fully understand all of the truth about any subject. Our minds, incredible though they are, aren’t capable of such feats, due to the incomprehensibly complex nature of reality itself. If we take the example of a standard deck of 52 cards, we can get a sense of the inherent complexity of reality.
How many possible shuffles are there in a deck of cards? The question seems rather straightforward, but it’s not. The reason for this is how woefully unprepared our brain is to calculate such large numbers from seemingly simple systems. To calculate all the possible combinations we get from shuffling a deck of cards, we must use what’s called a factorial function. A factorial is a self reducing recursive function that keeps multiplying against itself until it reaches 1. We write this as N! where N is whatever number we are using and the ! represents the factorial function. We solve 3! by calculating 3x2x1 which equals 6. If we solve for 5! the calculation is 5x4x3x2x1 which equals 120. Notice how steeply the number went up from being only 6 to 120 just from switching 3! to 5!. Pay attention because the increase from 5! to 52! will blow your mind.
To calculate the total number of possible combinations in a standard 52 card deck requires us to calculate the factorial function of 52. So, 52! = 52x51x50… x1 = 8.0658^1067. This means that 52! equals the number 8.0658 taken to the 1067th power. This means multiplying 8.0658 times itself 1067 times in a row. This equals a number that’s incomprehensibly large and nearly 1000 digits long, not including any digits to the right of the decimal point. To at least marginally comprehend the size of this number, here’s an example of how big this number is that I found from the article Wild Explanations Of How Many 52 Card Deck Combinations Just Broke My Brain, by Cass Anderson. I must admit that I cannot verify this answer as I don’t have the mathematical skills to do so. But the absurdly large nature of the example is, at least directionally, correct.
While Standing on the equator, set a timer to count down from 52! seconds. To help pass the time, turn to True North and take one step in a straight line every billion years. Once you’ve circled the Earth, take one drop of water from the Pacific Ocean. Once you’ve emptied the ocean, lay down one sheet of paper at the bottom. Now, refill the ocean and keep repeating this process until you’ve laid down enough sheets of paper to reach the sun. Once you’ve reached the sun, repeat the entire process from scratch again. You will reach the sun using this insane process approximately 3000 times before the timer will finish its countdown.
This is the ni-incomprehensibly large number of possible shuffles that emerge from a single deck of cards that one can buy at any drug store. The number of possible chess board configurations after 40 moves is conservatively estimated at 10^120. That’s the equivalent of multiplying the number of atoms in the observable universe by 10^40. What makes the examples of chess and a deck of cards so stark is the incredible number of possibilities in systems whose parameters are well defined. What happens when we look at systems we can’t entirely map out and/or define? What happens when we try to understand systems whose very parameters are more complex than we can imagine and/or comprehend?
Weather systems, ecosystems, economic systems, and biological systems, even those found in a single celled organism, are all operating on a framework that’s so complex we can’t fully define it. If we can’t map out the framework of a system, then we will likely be guessing at the process it undergoes. If we have to guess at a system’s process, then it will likely be really hard to predict. There are so many systems that we can’t fully define, let alone understand, that there might as well be an infinite number of them. This thing we call reality exists on a level of complexity that we literally cannot understand or even fathom. Unlike shuffling a deck of cards, I cannot give you an analogy that even comes close. Our minds cannot understand such vast interconnected systems in this impossibly complex realm we call reality. This is why the truth is something we can always get closer to but will never fully understand. Even with the advent of artificial intelligence (AI) and quantum computing we will still never get there.
But what does any of this mean for us as human beings? What are the consequences of all this? Does this mean we really are just specks of dust with no importance whatsoever or is there something more to our lives? How does one create meaning in the face of such overwhelming complexity? I would argue that the answer can be found in learning itself. When we read people’s biographies or just think about our own lives, the most profound things in our life came from moments of intense and immense amounts of learning. Whether that’s learning the joy of making love to our spouse, making the discovery of a lifetime, or realizing the degree to which we love our children. All of the greatest moments in life, the ones that make it worth living, come in moments of heightened learning.
There’s something in the human soul that cries out for learning. This is why we don’t remember where we were the moment a loved one died or a large calamity like 9/11 happens. What we remember is where we were and what we were doing the moment we learned of the death of a spouse or the bombings of 9/11. It’s the experience of learning that produces the meaning. If that loved one died because we never learn of it, there’s no effect. There’s something about the process of learning itself that allows us to make meaning from so much complexity. But, how learning and the complexity of reality come together to produce meaning in our lives will have to wait for another day. Until then, have faith, live well, and learn all that you can!