Both the Socratic and dialectic method are based on a discussion between

two or more people who may carry differing views but wish to pursue the
truth by seeking an agreement with one another. Meanwhile, the scientific
method is a process of determining truth or knowledge through
experimentation, inductive and deductive reasoning, and hypothesis or
theory testing.

The scientific method, also called empirical method, is a process of

determining truth or knowledge through experimentation, inductive and
deductive reasoning, and hypothesis or theory testing

Logic is the truth based on reasoning and critical thinking. It includes

analysis and construction of arguments. It serves as path to freedom from
half-truths and deception.

DOMAINS OF TRUTH
•In our present society, many people associate truth with what is a fact or
what can be proven by science. Truth is what is backed-up by research, by
experiments, data- gathering and analysis, and repeated verification.
Philosophers call this "objective truth" because the idea does not change
regardless of who is viewing them (Corpuz, 2016). Examples are the facts
given about Covid19 virus which are based on research. These truths are
part of the objective domain of life.
• This are beliefs that people hold on to for example the truth of love of a
family, the goodness of serving others, on what is good and what is evil, the
importance of loyalty to friends, the goodness of doing sacrifices for other
people, and many others. These are truths that we believe in despite not
being based on facts or scientific methods. These are truths in the social
domain. These are the truths that are created, constructed or agreed upon
by people and these are embedded in our culture and in our ways of life.

And finally, there is the personal domain which is analogous to sincerity.

What the person says is tested by his/her sincerity and the trust that other
people put on him/her. This domain of truth is very risky and unstable since
we do not have access to the thoughts and intentions of people. Truth is
established when the person's actions and decisions confirm to what he
says and thereby establishing trust. When a person says and does what
he/she says, he/she is considered as authentic being and a trustworthy
person (Corpuz, 2016).

TRUTH THEORIES
1. Correspondence Theory means that the statement has to be tested with
facts in reality. This employs the senses and a good sense of vocabulary or
linguistic analysis. Reality has to correspond to the statement, otherwise it
is untrue.
Example: My girlfriend Nadette is tall and beautiful.
(This is true if in reality... I have a girlfriend, her name is Nadette; she is tall
and she's beautiful.)

2. Coherence Theory implies that the justification of the truth of the

statement is within the sentences themselves. It employs use of logical,
analytical and linguistic tools in determining errors or inconsistencies within
the used words. The absence of errors, contradictions and confusions
would make one accept the truth of such a statement.

Examples are often seen in scientific or analytical topics where the proof of
the statements are contained in the sentences themselves.
a. He who is seriously sick needs medical attention.
b. All creatures are mortal beings.
c. My answer is either right or wrong.

3. Pragmatic Theory. This theory gives attention to the effects or

consequences of the statement. It answers the question, "Does it work?"
Not all statements can be tested using this theory so it cannot stand alone
as the sole test for truth.
Example.
a. Sleeping can help me grow tall.
b. Watching NBA plays can help me become a good player.

•Arguments are claims that are accompanied by reasons that try to

expound the opinion on an issue an argument is a series of statements that
support a claim and usually ends in a conclusion.

•Not all arguments are good in terms of reasoning. Some are erroneous or
illogical. They are called fallacies. These are arguments that deviate from
the issue and some use tools that are not connected to the issue.

•Fallacies - These are arguments that seem to be logical but upon further
investigation, they are actually erroneous and deceptive. The errors can be
in their language or structure or it can be in their content. (Sahakian, 1975)

There are many types of fallacies, here are some of the common ones.

1. Equivocation - this is a fallacy which uses a word that has 2 or more

literal meanings. The word is being used in the argument as if it has only
one meaning. Confusion results when the meaning interpreted is not the
intended one

Ex: a. Love is blind.

God is love.
Therefore, God is blind.
The word blind in the 1st sentence is not used in the same context as in the
second sentence. Hence the conclusion sounds funny or beside the point.

2. False Cause - an error is committed when cause and effect relation is

imposed on something because one event happened just after another
event.
Example:
a. It rained just after I sang. (My singing is NOT the cause).
b. I got zero in my quiz because I ate an egg this morning. (egg equals zero)
c. Common forms are superstitious beliefs in wedding practices. It is bad
luck for the couple if during the wedding, a glass or a plate is broken.

3. Hominem - It is committed when arguments are focused on the person

instead of on the issue. Common forms are mudslinging and character
assassination.
Ex.
a. I do not believe this witness. She is crippled and she is very young. (The
error lies in focusing at the character of the girl instead of her testimony.)
b. Who are you? You are just the janitor. No one will ever believe you.

4. Baculum - arguments use force, intimidation, and threats.

Examples:
a. If you do not approve my report, your family will be hurt.
b. Teacher: Submit your outputs on time or I will deduct 10 points.
c. Sign on a private property: Trespassers will be shot. Survivors will be shot
again

5. Misericordiam - this is appeal to pity / emotion instead of W appealing

to reasons
Examples:
a. A student caught cheating was asking for consideration saying he needs
to have a grade of 92 so his father will not whip him.
b. A mom begs for alms and uses her baby to appeal to pity.
6. Populum - appeals to what is popular or appeal to what the people like.
Ex:
a. It is okay to use tattered jeans in school because it is trendy.
b. You should have a Facebook account because everyone has one.

7. Begging the Question. This is committed when the statement you need
to prove is the same idea you are using to prove it. It was only restated
differently.
Example:
a. I am not wrong in my argument because I am right.
b. Student A: Why are you here?
Student B: I am here because I am not there.

A. FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF LOGIC

1. Deductive reasoning
It is done by using premises that are related. It starts from a general
statement followed by a specific statement and from their relation, a
conclusion can be drawn logically. This implies that the third statement is
valid, but not necessarily true*.
Ex:
All vegetable farmers are hardworking and simple people.
Alex and Donimor are vegetable farmers.
Therefore, Alex and Donimor are hardworking and simple people.

2. Inductive Reasoning
It starts from different specific statements which are related. A conclusion
is then derived from them. The conclusion here is weak compared to the
deductive reasoning because it is only a probable necessity.
Ex.
George Vargas, a mayor for 3 terms in the early 90's, is running for Mayor.
He is already 76 years old and still wants to serve. There are many younger
equally qualified candidates for the post. 65% of the voters are from 18-24
years old. They do not know Vargas. Therefore, George Vargas will not win
as the mayor of the town. (The conclusion is only probable)
B. FROM EXISTENTIALIST POINT OF VIEW

One person's search for the truth can be influenced by his attitude or
outlook in life. One example of attitude is Existentialism. This attitude gives
emphasis to personal freedom and one manifestation of the authentic self
is the exercise of making choices.

Existentialism gives much importance to the individual authentic self rather

than on the "public or herd identity" which makes people blind and simply
follow.

Hence, for the existentialist, to search for truth is to make "rational

choices".

C. LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS

Many thinkers believe that truth cannot be objectively expressed by

language (Ramos, 2016). They believe that language or the use of language
cannot express truth as truth, but only parts of the truth. Language has
limitations in telling the truth. Hence, to understand the truth is to
understand how language works and to be able to identify the errors and
problems that are present in language.

All these methods boil down to critical thinking which is a careful,

reflective, rational and systematic approach to questions of very general
interest (Ramos, 2016). Maboloc and Pascua (2008) add that critical
thinking is a lifelong process of self- assessment involving analysis, re-
examination, willingness to change one's point of view and even saying "I
don't know."
LIMITATIONS OF THE HUMAN PERSON

Human persons are naturally deficient beings. This means that we are not
prepared with the best physical aspects among all the beings
Ex:
Human persons do not have the natural ability to fly.

LIMITATIONS CAN LEAD TO POSSIBILITIES

Transcendence is the ability to change, be dynamic, and continually

redefining one's self which works with our facticity to create change.

"If you were born poor its not your mistake but if you die poor its your
mistake"
-Bill Gates

HOW DO LIMITATIONS LEAD TO TRANSCENDENCE?

Facticity refers to the things in our life that are already given
EXAMPLE: LIFE

We are free to define who we are and who we are to be

Spatial-temporal being - As temporal beings, our most obvious limitation is

our finitude - our finite quality or state. For example, Walang forever, pero
meron talaga.

As spatial beings, we are limited by our bodies to be present in two or more

places at the same time. We are limited by space (spatial) and the time
(temporal). Our spatial-temporal situation sets our preconditions of
understanding.