No one can provide definitive evidence on what is objectively true (science, our most effective and reliable model of reality, still has fundamental questions about the nature of reality that it is currently trying to solve). That being the case, a working definition of truth could be: a paradigm that propagates functionality and fits within the constraints of ethics that is able to iterate over long stretches of time (thanks Professor Jordan Peterson). People encounter trouble when they ditch functionality (hippies) or ethics (fanatics), or the consideration that requires them to iterate their methods over time (idealists). So in order to avoid these pitfalls, I leave objective reality up to physicists and professional philosophers; I’m not a good enough mathematician or deep enough thinker to keep up with those folks. I simply focus on constant self-assessment, asking myself if I’m functional, ethical, and whether I’m iterating both those considerations as best I can in the present moment.
Dirty Sci-Fi Buddha 
I am the nearest thing to truth and I’m not even sure about that.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Ugh this hurts my brain. I like though.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Everything in moderation… even moderation 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agreed!
LikeLike
Good closing: ” I simply focus on constant self-assessment, asking myself if I’m functional, ethical, and whether I’m iterating both those considerations as best I can in the present moment.” Tied it up into a nice, cogent package.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank You! i like to focus on what’s individually practical.
LikeLike
Works for me.
Keep at it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s all in the questions one asks of oneself… 🤔
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agreed!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Have a wonderful day! Ask the big questions!😊
LikeLiked by 1 person