I was interested in the definition of truth, i followed this post

What is the difference between Fact and Truth?

what I understood is that truth is anything I believe in or appears to be accurate from my prespective

I was curious in what ways would I word a difference between a truth and a belief

Lets take a example that same example "grass is green"

i can say that "It is true grass is green" but saying "i believe grass is green" sounds weird

i can also say from my perspective that "the truth is that god exists" but that yields a similar result to "I believe god exists"

I find it confusing to point a difference between the terms, is my definition of truth misdirected? and what would be a accurate distinction?

  • Belief is a subjective production. Truth is a logical object.
    – RodolfoAP
    Commented May 28, 2022 at 10:36
  • 2
    We may believe in somethin that is false; magic,astrology Commented May 28, 2022 at 11:35
  • Your notion of truth is wrong. The way you put it sounds as if there is only one type of truth. There are clearly more than one. For instance there are contingent truths and objective truths. They are not identical or even equivalent to each other. You can look into each one. A FACT is a scientific term that is also a bit emotional. A fact is supposed to be a claim that holds to reality & holds up to scientific scrutiny. People expect evidence when they think claim x is a FACT. Science requires sense verification or sorry there no discussion. Philosophy doesn't need sense verification.
    – Logikal
    Commented May 28, 2022 at 15:07
  • @MauroALLEGRANZA Your claim that magic is false is only from your perspective. If I have a perspective that encourages me to believe in magic, then that is the truth for me. In that sense truth is subjective. Commented May 28, 2022 at 16:23
  • 1
    Sure... someone succedeed flying on the Moon using Newtonian mechanics. You can try using magic: it will be less expansive. Commented May 29, 2022 at 8:19

6 Answers 6


You are confusing the meaning of a sentence with the mental characteristics implied by saying it. The two sentences

A. It is true that God exists.

B. I believe that God exists.

May imply the same thing about the person saying them, but they say different things and have different truth conditions. A is about God and whether he exists. B is about the speaker and what the speaker believes. A is true if and only if God exists; it doesn't matter whether the person saying A believes God exists or not. B is true if an only if the speaker believes that God exists; it doesn't matter whether God actually exists or not.

Suppose an atheist says A to comfort a dying friend. The atheist doesn't believe that God exists, but that doesn't make the sentence false if God actually exists. On the other hand if the atheist says B, then B is false whether God exists or not, because the atheist does not in fact believe that God exists.

  • > A is true if and only if God exists; it doesn't matter whether the person saying A believes God exists or not. (referencing the post - difference-between-fact-and-truth) From what i understand in this post, the quality of being true is left up to prespective, from one's prespective, god may seem to be true, from another's it may not, and that truths arent facts. So my origin of confusion is, what is the difference between this definition of truth and beliefs Commented May 28, 2022 at 7:08
  • 1
    @KrypticCoconut, I think the answer is trying to say that you can't confuse the speech act with the proposition. It might be right to interpret one person saying "A is true" as implying the same thing as "I believe A" in some context, but in more formal languages like mathematics, for example, we might want to separate semantics from intentionality, because in those situations the primary purpose of the language is not to speak but rather (on one account at least) to organize and determine implications.
    – Paul Ross
    Commented May 28, 2022 at 7:21
  • 2
    @KrypticCoconut, the quality of being true is not left up to perspective. Not only is that claim false, it is self-defeating in the following sense: is it true that truth always depends on perspective? If it is, then there are some perspectives in which that claim is false, where truth does not depend on perspective, so it is not true that truth always depends on perspective. That question about the difference between truth and fact was just confused. Commented May 28, 2022 at 9:00
  • We should stick to saying things that don't matter whether we believe them or not. I'd rather be wrong because I didn't believe in something I was asserting. I can correct my beliefs, I can't do a thing about what is true.
    – Scott Rowe
    Commented Sep 24, 2022 at 13:35

Heidegger contrasts truth, appearance (aletheia) and belief. We see appearance, so there must be an underlying truth. Belief incorporates other assumptions.

Aletheia - Wikipedia :-

Heidegger ... wrote that "Aletheia, disclosure regarded as the opening of presence, is not yet truth. Is aletheia then less than truth? Or is it more because it first grants truth as adequatio and certitudo, because there can be no presence and presenting outside of the realm of the opening?"

In further depth here: Contributions to Philosophy (of the Event), 236. Truth

Followed by reflection on belief:-

Belief, especially in its open or tacit opposition to knowledge, means deeming true that which withdraws from knowledge in the sense of explanatory insight (for example: to "believe" a report whose "truth" cannot be verified but which is vouched for by informants and witnesses).

from Contributions to Philosophy (of the Event), 237. Belief and truth

  • This is useful, but doesn't really talk about truth's definition as such, which the questioner seems particularly confused about, in favour of its contrasts with other ideas. Do you think there's more in Heidegger that might point to where to start on Truth?
    – Paul Ross
    Commented May 28, 2022 at 7:33
  • 1
    Truth is pretty much what appearance stands on but can't be accessed. As 236 says: "Is there indeed truth? How? If truth were not, on what would stand even the mere possibility of the "why"? Does the why-question already confirm the fact that there is truth, that truth must be in some way or other." Broadly truth is the ground of the clearing of appearance. Commented May 28, 2022 at 9:21
  • I wish these smart people weren't so taken with speaking in tongues. Where are the real prophets?
    – Scott Rowe
    Commented Sep 24, 2022 at 13:32
  • 1
    @ScottRowe - It's a bit like cryptic crosswords. Once you get the jargon it's kind of fun. Commented Sep 24, 2022 at 16:15

Truth is an objective concept and remains untouched even if everyone ignores it. belief on the other hand is more subjective and owes its existence to its believers.

  • 1
    Your answer could be improved with additional supporting information. Please edit to add further details, such as citations or documentation, so that others can confirm that your answer is correct. You can find more information on how to write good answers in the help center.
    – Community Bot
    Commented May 28, 2022 at 10:39

Truth is a material reality whereas belief exists in the mind of humans and may or may not correlate with material reality


As a noun, a truth means that a statement is factually correct whereas a believe is a desire or hope for a statement to be factually correct.

It should be noted; Although 'believe' is often associated with religion, this does not have to be, and is not always, the case.



Here is where I left off studying Philosophy in college:
ME: How can we tell the difference between truth and a false belief?
PROF: Truth is true and a false belief is false.
ME: But how can we see it?
PROF: By the results.
ME: But how can we tell in advance?
PROF: We can't.

And so, I concluded that Philosophy is as useful at knowing truth as a postmortem is at preventing death.

  • 1
    It's not just philosophy; the same is true of practically every area of knowledge outside of mathematics. Commented Jun 13, 2022 at 10:19
  • @DavidGudeman I guess we should stick to mathematics if we want to know anything before it hits us. It's like: the unreasonable ineffectiveness of, well, everything. Caveat - I am an Engineer, so I want to know that what I build will work.
    – Scott Rowe
    Commented Sep 24, 2022 at 13:29

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .