On 4/12/02 11:41:00 AM, Eric Falk wrote:
>On 4/12/02 11:16:00 AM, Amy Hall wrote:
>>Tompkins suggests that truth
>>is in the eye of the beholder
>>pretty much, leaving it all
>>relative. I think her
>>conclusion is a cop-out. Just
>>because she couldn't find the
>>truth does not mean that there
>>wasn't one
>>When she says that "any one
>>fact is perspectival doesn't
>>change its factual nature in
>>the slightest. It merely
>>reiterates it. (688)" I have
>>to disagree. If three people
>>see a car accident happen,
>>each from an alternate point
>>of view, every account will
>>likely be different. Fair
>>enough, every person is giving
>>"their truth" but just because
>>it is true to them does not
>>make it true. There is really
>>only one thing that has
>>happened, even if it cannot be
>>completely reached. Every
>>person will doubt what the
>>other has said, because they
>>saw their side with their own
>>eyes. Their perspectives
>>distort the truth, but the
>>truth is still there. Every
>>person distorts it in their
>>own way.
>>Tompkins conclusion is
>>relatively unclear to me, but
>>I do believe that I disagree.
>Something does happen weather you are
>there to witness it all or not. I can
>totaly agree with you that people do see
>the same thing differently, thats just
>how life works.
>
>

I agree with you, the accident story really puts it all clearly into my head what truth is really about. It can be real to some and still not be the actual truth.

Kim Harris