**A Perfect Empirical Truth Predicate Requires Omniscience**
Gregory Francis Coppola
Apocalypse Book Club
August 22, 2023
# Introduction
This paper casts the informal, and colloquially used concept of “**truth**” in a formal way, by introducing the concept of an **empirical truth predicate**.
We show that the existence a **perfect empirical** **truth** **predicate** requires the existence of an **omniscient entity**.
In colloquial language, an *****************omniscient entity***************** would correspond to what people think of as “******God******”.
We thus understand why it is that, **post-modernists**, who reject God, also reject truth.
# Empirical Truth Predicate
## Truth Predicate
A **truth predicate** is a **boolean function** over **sentences** ******************************in ********************************logical language**.
A **language** is a possibly infinite **set** of **sentences**, with each *sentence* either clearly **in** or **out** of the *language*.
A **logical language** is one in which **implication** (i.e., logical inference) is defined, so that from a set of ****premises****, we can clearly define the ************consequences************ of these premises.
## Universe State
An **************************************************empirical truth predicate************************************************** defines defines a truth predicate over what “**actually exists**”.
This presumes that there is something called “reality”, which is isomorphic to a state machine.
That is, at any given time index, there is some ************************universe state************************, which can be described in some language.
Presumably the various states are related to each other using a set of *****************state transitions*****************, but we don’t actually need to even take a position on this.
## Indexed State
We assume that the entire history of the universe can be recorded as a set of indexed states, which are pairs of 1) a **time index**, and 2) a **Turing-representable state**.
Presumably this set would be finite, but we don’t use the assumption that it is finite, so the same discussion would work if somehow there were an infinite number of states.
# Aspects of an Empirical Truth Predicate
## Finite Beings
We contrast two **archetypes** of beings, which recur over different **************aspects************** of beings.
**Finite beings** are **************limited************** in various aspects.
This is compared with the archetype of an ************omniscient being************, which is unlimited with respect to the given characteristics.
## Perception
All **finite beings** have ************************************limited perception************************************.
That is, even assuming that there is a describable **universe state** underlying any time index, limited perception beings do not have the ability to perceive this universe state directly.
Instead, the perception of *************finite beings************* is mediated by **************************finite senses**************************.
It is known, for example, that there are more electromagnetic waves, for example X-rays or gamma rays, that humans cannot detect at all.
There is no bound on the number of aspects of universal state that limited humans cannot detect.
## Interpretation
Every **individual** has their own **individual language**.
The collection of *individual languages* in a **community** make up a **community language**, which would be analogous to English or Spanish, etc.
However, only the *individual languages* are actually instantiated in the physical universe, and the concept of a ******************community language****************** does not actually exist in the world.
In order to define truth over an individual sentence, we need to actually “**mind read**” the person or community who said it.
This means that the interpreter must be aligned with the what the interpreter “would have intended”.
This would imply, for one thing, that, no matter how much new information the individual receives, they will never learn anything which contradicts this answer.
## Memory
In order to be able to define a complete truth predicate, the interpreter must have an accurate recording of the ******unmediated universe state****** at any given time index.
Humans have fallible **memories**.
That is, even among the fallible sense perceptions of humans, they still forget most of what they once perceived.
# Perfect Truth and Fallible Entities
A **perfect empirical truth predicate** is an *empirical truth predicate* that has:
- unmediated perception
- perfect interpretation
- perfect memory
This is analogous to what we colloquially call the “*capital T Truth*”.
## Fallible Entities
A ******************************fallible entity****************************** has one or more of the following:
- fallible interpretation
- fallible perception
- fallible memory
The fallibility of ***any*** of these three properties would make a being unable to provide a perfect truth predicate.
# Results
## Combination of Fallible Entities
Proposition:
- A collection of fallible entities is still fallible.
There is no guarantee that two fallible quantities, when added, will add up to the infinite quantity that would be needed to be infallible, whether for **************interpretation**************, ******perception******, or ******memory******.
## Truth Requires Omniscience
Proposition:
- A perfect empirical truth predicate requires there to be an interpretation entity with properties:
- infallible interpretation
- infallible perception
- infallible memory
If this were not so, and one of these properties were limited, then the truth predicate would not be perfect.
A being which is infallible on all three dimensions we will call **********************omniscient**********************.
# Discussion
## Omniscience is God
In colloquial usage, the only being that would be “omniscient” would be God.
Thus, we can say that, “for truth to exist, we have to have a God.”
## Why Post-Modernists Reject Truth
Post-modernists *often* reject:
- that there exists an “actual” state of the universe
Post-modernists, when they are ****************atheists****************, which is *******usually*******, reject:
- that there exists an omniscient being
As we saw, “capital T Truth” requires both of these things.