How do I deal with the fact that nothing is an objective "truth"? I understand that this is a very pleb-tier existential dilemma, but it's still one I suffer from. It's hard for me to think seriously about the world, and about history, when nothing feels totally true. When I read history books, for instance, I know that a lot of it is probably exagerrated, from second hand accounts, written for political reasons, etc. I feel like I would enjoy history a lot more if I just accepted what I read as being true, and didn't question every sentence for whether it was actually true.
And when it comes to modern science, I know that everything I observe is filtered through my perception, which is flawed and doesn't truly grasp "reality". So how do I deal with the fact that everything I observe, everything I read is probably not the capital T truth?
Is it necessary to sort of just "accept" that everything is mostly subjective truth, and try to live with it? I think this is why I like video games and fictional universes so much: the universe they put forth is objective, what you see is what you get.
the only way out is to stop caring.
>>1640099
Empirical data is the only determiner of real truth. Everything else is an approximation.
>>1640099
>How do I deal with the fact that nothing is an objective "truth"? I
Well, you know this statement has to be proven. See the irony of it? If nothing can be empirically proven to be correct, neither can that statement.
You need to find yourself a philosophical ideal which can withstand a nihilistic gauntlet and let you live in the chaos.
Mines spiritual, essentially agnostic, we dunno, yet. Doesn't mean it won't be reveled to us at some stage, and if it is going to be revealed it means it does exist, so therefore it can be reasoned that we do have purpose, we just don't know it yet - if you want to believe that there is a reason.
I mean there is no evidence either way.
vaporwave aesthetics are overrated as fuck
fight me
>>1640099
Just accept that we wuz kangz and get on with your life.