Like everybody else I thought of a truth as a very simple concept.

Humans breathe air. Truth.

Birds fly. Truth..well for the most part.

Pineapple pizza sucks. Truth.

It was up until few days ago when I was watching Joe Rogan interview with J. Peterson and B. Weinstein where they briefly talked about the concept of truth as something not constant. However to explain such claim I needed to start from the basics.

"Perhaps nobody yet has been truthful enough about what "truthfulness" is."(Friedrich Nietzsche)

What is truth and lie?

"Truth is most often used to mean being in accord with fact or reality." this is what you would find on wikipedia. If you however scrolled further you would find that the concept of truth is to this day still discuss in many areas.
A common view is that the good and the true are connected in harmony. For one to discover truth is to have a pleasurable experience. The idea therefore is, the more truths are discovered the better the humanity will be.

Friedrich Nietzsche' concept of truth

Friedrich Nietzsche is was a German-Swiss philosopher who argued that truth is impossible and there can only be a perspective and interpretation, driven by a person's interests or will to power.
The concept of the good and the true, in Nietzsche's eyes, are often in conflict. In "The Will to Power", he presented this idea:"The truth is the kind of error without which a certain species of life could not live. The value for life is ultimately decisive." Therefore he view the quest for truth to be neither peaceful nor pleasurable but a battle requiring courage.
Nietzsche advocated a method for individuals seeking truth based on his belief that:" Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."

A lie is an outward expression of a falsehood one inwardly knows to be false, meaning the liar can still know the truth.
A Conviction is an inward certainty one has attained the truth, and thus in many cases, gives way to an arrogance that enmeshes one in web of delusion and falsehood, and cuts one off from the possibility of moving towards knowledge.

He called it Experimentalism.

Experimentalism

To be experimentalist, one would have to become it's own greatest critic constantly evolving his ideas throughout time and attacking every truth that one believes. Ability of human mind is to change it's beliefs and therefore correct the error in truth.

Such person would become sceptic. Does that mean that sceptic is the most truthful person? In Darwinian sense yes. This concept therefore tells us there would be infinity number of truths about a single thing. However, that is not very practical way to view a reality.

Jordan Peterson bases his concept of truth on Nietzsche's principles which are leaned more towards Darwinian ideology. He argues that there are 2 main truths:

Metaphorical ruth that manifest itself in the manner that you act. This was the original truth. "The arrow flies straight and true." or "I'm the way the truth and the light."

The objective truth manifest itself as a representation of the objective world. This is subjective to natural selection or metaphorical truth.

These both coexist with one another but sometimes they dissociate.

However Bret Weinstein or Sam Harris think of factual truth as the ultimate truth.

It seems to me that almost everybody has a slightly different perception of how to view to truth. That is not necessarily incorrect because it provides more sceptical view for society.

The problem

How can we discuss complex issues when we can't even agree on meaning of the word. Somethings is either true or not and somethings might not be either.

Conclusion
To me even objective truth is not really objective because person presenting it has an a-priori bias to their own conception of what truth is. Since it's an a-priori observation, how would you even be able to tell that your view for objective truth is complete, without it being pointed out by someone else who elevates meta-physical truth over rational truth?
Therefore I believe metaphysical and rational truth are in balance with each other. Imagine yin and yang, one cannot outweighs the other in the world. However, based on temperament of individual, one lean more towards one than the other.Whether they are conscious of it or not.
However if one is unconscious about such a thing what is the point? If something exist without it making any little disturbance in one's or someone else's life, there is not even point discussing it. I think we should take truth as the factual truth but still be sceptical about every truth be believe. This will efficiently provide stable progress in society.

This topic used all my intellectual capacity, so please express your opinion and this matter and try to change my mind. I will gladly continue this discussion in the comments.

ME:
INSTAGRAM- @myllerio
FACEBOOK- https://www.facebook.com/robo.muller