In Rhetoric, Aristotle states “The true and the approximately true are apprehended by the same faculty; it may also be noted that men have a sufficient natural instinct for what is true, and usually do arrive at the truth. Hence the man who makes a good guess at truth is likely to make a good guess at probabilities”. Aristotle believes that people will always pick out the truth; the truth will always be revealed. For Aristotle, the truth is straightforward and all truths are logical. “Rhetoric is useful (1) because things that are true and things that are just have a natural tendency to prevail…” The truth will always be logical and you will become better because of it. Plato’s idea of truth, on the other hand, is a little different. He …show more content…
In the passage, there are two groups: one that believes that the truth and falsehood are the same while the other believes that they are different things. These two are “contrasting arguments”. The author states that they side with the latter, that the truth and the untruth are two opposite things. “It is clear then, that the same statement is false when the false is present to it, and true when the true is present to it.” This is saying that the truth can be contextual. In the Dissoi Logoi, there is not one universal truth and the truth is the truth, the false is the false. To sum it all up, the truth cannot be explained one way, there are many aspects to it. Throughout the readings though, they talk about the truth and how there is always a truth in some way, shape, or form. None of them argue that there is no truth and everything in life is a lie. Aristotle believes in a universal truth, Plato believes that the truth is what you know, but that there is a universal truth to some things, and the Dissoi Logoi explains that truth is contextual. Though they all have different views on what the truth is, they all explain how their truth is how things