Haley11, you say, “What I realized ultimately is that there is no truth anymore.” Is that TRUE?
Well, there is truth and then there is the interpretation of truth. An example might be: “The US is in debt”. True statement. Almost nobody will debate that. BUT it’s the interpretation of it that gets muddy. The left will say, “Yes we’re in debt but if we just raise taxes on the rich and end our wars, we can manage it.” And the right says “Yes we’re in debt, if we can just fire Big Bird and stop funding abortion and throw granny off the cliff while maintaining our Orwellian platform of Peace through Strength and balance the budget in another 40 years, everything will be fine.” And then you have the libertarians/Austrians “Yes we are in debt! We need to address it now, not in 40 years!! We predicted this crisis, we saw it coming, why are you ignoring us! Cut the military, fire Big Bird, lower taxes, yes all of it!!!”
So what is truth? The left has Krugman vindicating their point of view, we have the Austrians and supposedly history on our side. I don’t know what the Right has going for them. Who’s right and how do you determine who’s right?
I think the information era has been a boon for liberty, but it has also muddied the waters too. Now with information about pretty much everything literally at our fingertips, everyone can find an expert, a historian, an article, a something that will corroborate their view point. So how do you ever determine what is truth?
Which is I guess a way of affirming the original statement, that there is no reality, only perception.