What Is Truth?*

and thousands of things the scientists know to be truths , which the multitude disbelieves . Your analogy , Bro . Editor , between Truth and Masonry is ill-chosen , the former [ Truth ] being an abstract idea liable to change , and constantly changing , applied by different people to different and opposite objects , it being the A'ery cause of so many different and often opposing parties and sects , an idea upon AA'hich in no age , in no country , eA'en unanimity Avas affected , and upon AA'hich no doubt differences of opinion

will continue to the end of time . " —Craftsman , No . 4 , April , 1878 . Bro . Klotz has evidently mistaken fact for fancy , opinion for knoAvledge , inference for positive sight , and a notion of AA'hat is probable for Avhat is actual and certain . Listen to his reasoning on the folloAving illustration : " Take , for instance , the shape of the earth , hoAV many centuries Avas it considered a flat surface , either a disk , an OA'al or a square , etc various maps and books are still extant to prove this universal truth as then held by philosophers , geographers , and divines . . . AA'hich after a time proved fallacies , and were removed by new truths . "

In this passage human opinions are taken to be truths , and they are styled fallacies and truths in the same sentence . There is here a sad defect in the close accuracy AA'ith Avhich Avoids should be used , and as great a defect in the definition of ideas intended to be expressed . For instance , Bro . Klo . tz says : " Truth being an abstract idea , it has no limits , but for the time being it has a limit in the man ' s brain . " Let us test this statement . The earth is round . NOAV this truth certainly has a limit , not in the man ' s brainbut in the earth ' s shape . It Avould be round stflleA'en if the man had no

, , brains at all . And the truth is limited to the earth , and concerns nothing else . It has no more to do AA'ith the man ' s brains than the moon has to do AA'ith green cheese . It is grounded hi its geometrical nature : for the earth was round before ever brains of a man had been created , and will in all probability be round Avhen there are no more brains to knoAv or recognise the truth . Then again , two and two make four . This truth has its limit . Two and two don't make three , nor five , nor six , nor any other

product than four ; and this truth is totally independent of any man ' s brains . It is a mathematical fact and truth , and its existence is grounded in the nature of things , and not in the nature of men ' s brains . ( Everybod }' , not blind , kno \ A's there is a sun , moon , and stars . These are acknoAA'leclged truths , nobody denies them . The fact or truth of their existence does not depend on men ' s brains : they assuredly existed before there AA'ere any brains to take cognizance of their existence . That truth or fact of existence AVAI neA'er change so long as there is a sun , ' or a moon , and stars . )

Then again , TBTJTII IS not an abstract idea , as Bro . IOotz has affirmed . It is simply the property or attribute of a thing ; and is , therefore , all that we actually and positively knoAv of anything . Instead of being an abstract idea , it is the actual thing itself . My words and ideas are only images of the actual Truth . Here is a HOSE . Now everything AA'e knoAv of that rose is a truth—every property , and attribute and predicate is a truth , The number of its leaves , their size , colour , and arrangement . Their fragrancesoftnesssmoothnessand eA-ery other property and attribute are all

, , , truths and facts , because they are realities , and make the rose to be AA'hat it is . None of these facts are " abstract ideas . Their images become ideas in the mind ; but the facts or truths themselves are the properties and attributes of the . rose—they are the rose in . fact . No man in his senses Avould say that the attributes of so many leaves , form , size , Aveight , colour , etc . —in fact the rose itself—was in a man ' s brain . We only lenow a thing by its properties : and these are its facts or truths of existence . They are

the rose itself—take them away aud there is nothing left . When 3 'ou tell these facts and properties of the rose , you are telling about the rose itself—the properties and attributes are , in fact , the flower itself : because they are all that Ave can see , or smell , or feel , or know of it .

But we get up some theory of the reasons Avhy the flower lias these properties , then that theory is an inference , an opinion , not a truth . It is theory and opinion based upon facts and truths ; but it is mot truth itself . We may be able to demonstrate the theory so clearly that our opinion may reach the hi ghest point of probabilityalmost to a certainty , but it does not become absolute truth until that certainty is