Theory of Valid Post-Truth

The systematic elaboration of valid post-truth as a framework for understanding contemporary epistemology. The Theory of Valid Post-Truth argues that we are witnessing not the death of truth but its mutation—a shift from truth-as-correspondence to truth-as-performance, truth-as-identity, truth-as-weapon. It traces the conditions that produced this shift: the collapse of trusted institutions, the rise of social media, the weaponization of information, the fragmentation of publics. It doesn't celebrate this shift or lament it; it seeks to understand it, to map its contours, to navigate its terrain. The Theory of Valid Post-Truth is the attempt to think clearly about a world where truth is no longer what it was.

Example: "He'd been searching for a way to understand the new information landscape—the lies that felt true, the facts that convinced no one. The Theory of Valid Post-Truth gave him language: truth had mutated, shifted from correspondence to performance. He stopped trying to fight the old war and started learning to navigate the new terrain."

by Abzugal February 21, 2026

Absolute and Relative Truths

A companion distinction to Absolute/Relative Facts, but focused on propositions rather than brute reality. Absolute Truths are statements that correspond to reality in a way that transcends all perspectives, contexts, and frameworks. "2+2=4" is an Absolute Truth in arithmetic. Relative Truths are statements that are true within a particular framework but not necessarily outside it. "Stealing is wrong" might be true within a moral framework but isn't a brute fact about the universe. The confusion arises when people insist their Relative Truths are Absolute, or when they use the existence of Relative Truth to deny that any Absolute Truth exists at all.

Absolute and Relative Truths "You think your moral code is absolutely true for everyone, but it's actually just true relative to your culture and upbringing. Meanwhile, you're using that relativism to deny that 'torturing babies for fun is wrong' might actually be an Absolute Truth. Pick a struggle."

by Dumu The Void February 23, 2026

Hard Problem of Objective Truth

The philosophical nightmare of defining what "objective truth" even means, given that all truth claims are made by subjective beings with limited perspectives. If truth is correspondence to reality, how do we access reality directly to check the correspondence? If truth is coherence within a system, whose system wins? If truth is pragmatic usefulness, useful for whom and for what? The Hard Problem is that every definition of objective truth seems to sneak in subjective assumptions, leaving us wondering whether "objective truth" is a real thing we're approximating or a useful fiction that keeps us honest.

Hard Problem of Objective Truth "You keep saying you want 'objective truth' about politics. But the Hard Problem of Objective Truth is that your 'objectivity' looks suspiciously like your personal opinions with better branding. Maybe start with 'less wrong' and work from there."

by Dumu The Void February 23, 2026

Hard Problem of Truth

The fundamental puzzle of what truth actually is, before we get into which truths are true. Is truth correspondence to reality? Coherence with other beliefs? Practical usefulness? Social consensus? Divine revelation? Each definition has its champions and its fatal flaws. The Hard Problem is that we use "truth" constantly—in science, in law, in everyday life—but when asked to define it, we flail. It's like time: we know what it is until someone asks. This problem haunts every field because every field claims to pursue truth, yet none can definitively say what they're pursuing.

"Your honor, I swear to tell the truth. But the Hard Problem of Truth means philosophers can't agree on what truth is, so technically I'm swearing to something undefined. Can I get a ruling on whether correspondence theory or pragmatism applies in this courtroom?"

by Dumu The Void February 23, 2026

Appeal to Truth

A rhetorical fallacy where someone invokes "truth" as an authority to settle a question without specifying what truth means, whose truth, or how it applies. "I'm just interested in the truth" becomes a way of positioning oneself as objective while dismissing other views as biased. The fallacy lies in treating truth as a possession rather than a goal, as a club rather than a horizon. Everyone claims to seek truth; the claim doesn't settle anything. Appeal to Truth is argument from authority with truth as the authority—an authority that conveniently aligns with the speaker's position.

"I presented my perspective. Response: 'I'm just concerned with the truth, not your perspective.' That's Appeal to Truth—using the word as a weapon, not a goal. Truth isn't something you have and others lack; it's something we seek together. Claiming truth as your ally is just a way of declaring victory without argument."

by Dumu The Void February 28, 2026

Argument from Truth

A rhetorical move where someone argues that their position must be accepted because it is true, with "true" functioning as a self-justifying predicate. The argument is circular: it's true because it's true. The fallacy lies in treating truth as a property that can be asserted rather than demonstrated, as a conclusion rather than a claim. Argument from Truth is the most basic form of dogmatism—truth as mantra, as magic word, as conversation-ender.

"Why should I accept your view? 'Because it's true.' That's Argument from Truth—truth as assertion, not demonstration. But truth isn't a badge you wear; it's a claim you support. Calling your view true doesn't make it so; it just shows you've stopped arguing and started declaring."

by Dumu The Void February 28, 2026

Neutral and Impartial Truth Bias

A cognitive and metacognitive bias that treats a particular definition of truth—usually the Western, Enlightenment-derived conception—as if it were neutral, impartial, and universal, while ignoring the historical, cultural, and political factors that produced it. The Neutral and Impartial Truth Bias presents "truth" as a pure, contextless concept, erasing the power relations, colonial histories, and social struggles that shaped what counts as truth in the West. It assumes that Western rationality is just rationality, Western truth is just truth—not one tradition among many. The bias operates at both individual and collective levels, making it nearly invisible to those who hold it. They don't see themselves as having a truth tradition; they see themselves as having truth itself. Everyone else has culture, bias, perspective. The West has reality.

"Western science discovered truth; other cultures had beliefs." That's Neutral and Impartial Truth Bias: treating the West's definition of truth as truth itself, not as one tradition among many. The speaker didn't see their own historical position; they saw only objectivity. Truth became a possession, not a pursuit—and they owned it."

by Dumu The Void March 8, 2026