1. To What Extent Is Truth Different In Mathematics, The Arts And Ethics?

1. To what extent is truth different in mathematics, the arts and ethics?
Although truth is difficult to define, “tests for truth” are used to asses different Areas of Knowledge. For instance truth in mathematics is different in relation to truth in the arts and the ethics, for each is proven by using the different tests for truth. In mathematics truth is usually considered to be objectivebecause it is possible to algebraically prove certain identities and laws, and therefore obtain a same answer when a theorem is repeated. On the other side, truth in the arts appears to be subjective for each person experiments a diversity of different emotions when looking at the same work of art. In ethics, truth is mostly relative if viewed from the perspective that the parameters by we ought tolive vary from culture to culture. Nevertheless, it is possible to say that within each area of knowledge, these three types of truth – objective, subjective and relative – can be found using different tests and ways of knowing.
In mathematics, truth is considered to be objective and reliable due to the fact that is based on deductive reasoning based on logic. Nevertheless, mathematical truths arebased on axioms which are assumptions that enable to create theorems around them. In the case of Euclidean geometry the axioms are considered to be truthful even using the correspondence method which requires proof or evidence. However, in the case of other mathematical systems, theorems which are agreed upon as truths are based on previous theorems or axioms that have been considered to be “selfevident truths”, thus judging the theorems as truthful only if they follow the coherence test. Truths in mathematics are then, subjective to the axioms they rely on, each truth or theorem been actually true within its system. Trivial examples such as 2+2=4 can be proven using the correspondence method but in the majority of cases it is not simple to prove theorems using evidence and not relying onprevious theorems and axioms, if these were not considered as sufficient claim or mathematical proof.
The pragmatic test for truth is secondary but still important in mathematics because axioms are accepted as truth without empirical proof because they work and are useful. For instance by the end of the 19th century irrational, negative and imaginary numbers were widely accepted because of theirusefulness which facilitated work in mathematics. Debate arises as to the degree of usefulness to consider a claim as truth so general consensus agrees on mathematical theorems that will be accepted as truths. Overall, truth in mathematics might be portrayed as objective but only in the sense that theorems and formulas coherently derive from previous theorems and axioms and are useful andpragmatic. Rationalism rather than empiricism is what prevails in mathematics, this makes them questionable but at the same time, the meticulous procedure to create new effective theorems from previous ones makes them reliable as they are associated with reason (an objective and consistent way of knowing) to search for truth.
Art on the other hand does not have an established and reliable path to followin order to reach an objective truth. As Pablo Picasso said “we all know that art is not truth. Art is a fiction that enables us to recognize the truth”, therefore, truth in art comes with the message it conveys. Following this idea emphasized by Tolstoy, that art’s value is exclusively extrinsic, seeking truth in art would be very much linked to sense perception and emotions as the way toappreciate it. As Descartes prayed “the senses deceive from time to time, and it is prudent never to trust wholly those who has deceived us even once”; sense perception is not always the most effective and objective way of knowing. Thus when looking at a painting, the senses can misguide us to see and internalize a message in a unique way affected by our past experiences, age, culture among other...