Truth or facts?
"The truth is more important than the facts." - Frank Lloyd Wright
Ever since Debbie quoted that phrase to me, I've been pondering about it in the context of law. What do judges really do? They look at the facts and try to determine the truth as per the law. What do most lawyers do? They twist the law, fit the facts into its compartments, and portray it as the truth. How do people react? They determine the 'truth' based on their own convictions and then judge the facts. In actual fact, I have not decided what the true interrelationship between truth and fact is. But there have so far been two thoughts which I found interesting in relation to this train of thought. Let me share them with you.
"The manufacture of a five-pronged implement for manual digging results in a fork even if the manufacturer, unfamiliar with the English language, insists that he intended to make and has made a spade." - Per Lord Templeman in Street v Mountford [1985]
"It does not rain simply because the weatherman said it would". - per YingKs
Links

1 witness(es):
Was reading this entry when I gazed at the title: ratio and obiter.Ratio:The 'reason for the decided' and material facts of the case and it's decision thereon. Interesting cross between the facts and judgment to portray the greatest representation of truth.
A fact is not necessarily the truth. The truth is definitely a fact.Sadly, facts usually have a larger persuasive authority than the truth due to the fallacy of suspiscion described as 'seeing(or any other senses) is believing'. :)
Post a Comment
<< Home