[gls2ro]

We may need a better definition of this "truth" we are discussing.

> The best flavor of ice cream is chocolate

This is not a subjective truth. It is an opinion. And an opinion is not testable because it is subjective. Thus it cannot be judged on its truthfulness => ergo it is not a truth. Putting subjective in front of truth is making the truth part invalid.

A subjective truth is an opinion.

Now you want to make that a bit more testable, you need to add something that can be tested:

> The best ice cream for people with Alzheimer is chocolate ice cream

This is the trick that actually makes us debate. It wants to sound like the truth, but it is still a type of opinion: until this gets tested, this has a name - it is a hypothesis. That is kinda like a testable opinion. Still, opinion until tested.

But observe that the phrase has changed: from "best flavor," which is subjective, to "best for <group X>" which now can be tested.

I think we let ourselves too easy to talk about opinions as facts or having a truthy-like value.

[bryananderson]

Well, we’re kind of getting into word-games that I’m not sure are that meaningful, but I was thinking of the statement “the best flavor of ice cream is chocolate” where “best” means something like “the one that brings the most joy/utility/hedonic units/whatever.” I say it’s a truth rather than an opinion because it might well be testable in some way, such as by monitoring pleasure centers in my brain—but I say it’s subjective because that truth only has me-scope, not global scope. We’ve all met that person who stubbornly insists that the best flavor of ice cream (or whatever) for them must be the best for everyone, and somehow doesn’t grasp that others’ subjective experiences are different. That’s what I mean by subjective vs. objective truth.