“Truth is but a subset of fiction”. That’s one of those “Ken thinks himself clever ” quotes that I throw around sometimes.
I believe it to be true – and I believe a lot of unhappiness among seekers of truth in different fields would be wise to adopt.
Consider the amount of possible hypothesis available for any given phenomenon in the sciences. For every thing you postulate, there’s another way you could do it. And another. And another.
In theory, these should come together to form a narrative that we would consider truth.
Yet, due to the nature of scientific inquiry, A new discovery can take that prior truth and turn it into a fiction or at least a lesser truth.
This nimble and agile movement is one of the things that gives the science is their power – flexibility.
But this flexibility does have a cost. You can never find absolutes in that environment.
You can find them in rhetoric. I can tell you that something is absolutely true and if you believe me then it is.
The way the activities of the sciences are presented to nonscientists is that they are absolute truths. Rhetoric. It isn’t a bad thing. It could be used for bad things. They can be used for good things. Even the very publications of science is ultimately under the category of rhetoric – a subset.
The father of rhetoric is fable.
Everything else, including logic – is a child of rhetoric.