On objectivity, relativity and absoluteness of truth

Truth exists as the certain information about objects, obtained in various ways, which reveals in the current reality their specific essence only for subjects at a certain level of consciousness for their benefit, as well as for the application, that develops them, and changing with the loss of this level.

Key words: truth, consciousness, reality, living, inanimate, relative, absolute, person.

If to assume that truth is the adequate display of the reality in consciousness, or the adequate information on objects allowing the person to solve theoretical and practical problems, i.e. to developed consciously, don't stand still, to be in this regard as the free, then it is necessary to recognize by insufficient the definition of truth as soon as correspondence of a thing to intelligence so as, in particular, during life the person every time after processing of information from different sources has no sufficient confidence in the adequate display of the reality in own consciousness, and a lot of things he is forced to be taking on trust, and a lot of things to be testing in practice at random.
Therefore, those correct solutions, which the person finds, is difficult to call as the ultimate truth, they are rather the result of his experience, experience of prior generations, its own ingenuity, its ability to produce some general, to develop new theories, to deduce regularities on the basis of which he can produce new experiments, drawing other conclusions, and etc. But all this doesn't give exhaustive and final knowledge of a object.
Indeed, this definition can reflect only aspiration of human intelligence to cognition of things. The intelligence of the person is feeble, his life is short, and the real world is infinitely various. Some established patterns during cognition, flow of life are changed by others; new relationships, communications emerge.
At this, the world of the human relations is more complex and unstable, than the physical world. All achievements of human thought don't lead to elimination of dissociation of certain individuals and different peoples.
The nature shows the force periodically, incomparable with human, easily breaking any human construction, as and the person, despite a present technical equipment of mankind.
Therefore, the doubt appears in many minds: are there any comprehensive, full or absolute truths generally, time nothing can make the person happy, his life the infinite and cloudless and, at the same time, meaningful?
And indeed, we can operate by concept of absolute truth only concerning such banal statements as Volga flows into the Caspian Sea, and even then - in frames of the current life, when there are still seas and life itself.
The deepening of scientists in the microcosm, in the space exploration doesn't explain the appearance of the live in this world, appearance of self-consciousness in the hominid, more precisely, the appearance of the being which can understand oneself in any way.
Therefore, the definition of truth as full and exhaustive knowledge about such complex organized system of the world, believing such truth by absolute, absurdly on several reasons.
In particular, it is impossible to exhaust knowledge, inasmuch process of cognition so vast in the relations even only the Universe known to us is boundless. Besides that, process of cognition by the person is limited by five sense organs explicitly and opportunities of his cogitative apparatus.
Besides, there are also other measurements which, in principle, are unavailable to neither sensations of the person, nor his analytical skills. And generally, beingness, opened by consciousness in interaction with it, all the time changes, and these changes are irreversible. Changes of consciousness, from which depends quality of beingness, manifested by consciousness, are unpredictable and often arbitrary. If the absolute, more precisely, fundamental truth nevertheless exists, it should be defined in another way - without binding to omniscience, which is impossible and senseless.
As for objectivity of truth, this concept is interpreted by materialists, for example, in the person of Lenin V. I. so: "… can the human ideas have a content that don't depend on a subject, that doesn't depend either on a human being, or on humanity?" [1, chapter 2.4]; "For the materialist, sensations are images of the sole and ultimate objective reality, - ultimate not in the sense that it has already explored to the end, but in the sense that there is not and can't be other" [1, chapter 2.4].
Certainly, for the person and mankind objectivity of truth is manifested in existence of stars, planets, the person and his civilization; it is difficult to argue with this fact so how all this exists apart his will, and for example it is difficult "to force down" the Sun from an orbit, as well as to cancel all chemical and physical processes in a world and in an organism of a person.
However, a person is only the temporal expression of consciousness in the world created by consciousness. Each individual consciousness through the person creates "the present" or his own time, the direct surrounding, own life which, naturally, depends on this individual consciousness, but a single consciousness participates hidden in this process. This consciousness through the organs of sensations of a person, forms "now" of a person, i.e. that what is manifested before him.
We will mark also that there is nothing surprising in it so how each individual consciousness in a holographic projection is the single consciousness, and vice versa, but each individual consciousness in the form of living being, i.e. - in beingness, is personified temporarily by means of blocking of the direct connection from its side with a single consciousness. A single consciousness also forms a holographic projection of the eternal and infinite Uniform, or the infinity out of time, derivative of which is beingness.
Therefore, for consciousness beingness is" the creation" of own "hands" from own considerations or form-building abilities, but on the basis of the passive from Uniform.
Thus, similar beingness can't be independent from consciousness; at the same time it depends from Uniform and can't exist without it, but each individual consciousness in coexistence (life) with own carrier owing to a temporal alienation from single consciousness with own side "falls" in objectively existing (independent of it) the world with the objects which are moving in space and being in time, and among objects of this world there are also similar individual consciousnesses in the form of the living beings which anyway are forced to contact with each other, forming communities of this or that type depending on a level of their development.
At this, for each individual consciousness the distant external world in the form of universes, stars, oceans and all that consciousness in own carrier doesn't see directly or it is incapable to sense of all these objects, certainly, is an objective world though it is formed by single consciousness which represents also each individual consciousness; but any individual consciousness in human life, and in any living being, "is cut off" from single consciousness and therefore even own "now" it forms by means of single consciousness on the basis of the appropriate sense organs of the living being.
It is clear from here, that the close world, which appears us, or a surrounding of each person, his "now" too is not dependent directly from individual consciousness; any individual consciousness "accepts" a surrounding as it is, or as this world is manifested, although "now" of each individual consciousness is being formed on the basis of the sensations of a person, but the individual consciousness in the person "does" his own surroundings addicted of oneself partly only due to own activities. Actually, for this purpose the world is "given" to each individual consciousness in a person. Otherwise, without this base, it would be senseless to speak about development of consciousness within the available environment.
More details about a single consciousness and a holographic projection of an infinity out of time, or Uniform, are described, for example, in my monograph "The person as the hologram" (see, for example, www.litres.ru).
So that this difference in dependences and independence of the world from a person, the communication of the world with a person through sensations should mark, but not to declare unequivocally about secondariness of consciousness, about exclusivity of the objective reality, which is reflected in our sensations as it has done Lenin V. I. or to declare, as it has done Mach and Avenarius, about coincidence of consciousness (sensations) and matter.
The active (consciousness) can't be secondary in relation to lifeless objects, or to the things, which are not capable to be reproduced, to the things which are not have a genome as well as the reality can't be exclusive, sole – the reality for each living being is its own and this reality is "scooped" by consciousness of each living being by means of the sense organs, which it has, directly from boundless Uniform with the hidden help of a single consciousness, in order to correspond to each living being, species which there can be a set (ibid.).
Nietzsche, apparently, has understood, more precisely, he intuitively has felt this difficult ratio of things and consciousness (sensations). He, in particular, disagreed that correspondence of language (the thinking tool) of the external and internal reality is truth: "What such word? It is transmission by sounds of the first irritation. But to do the inference from the irritation of the nerves towards the reason, lying out of us, there is already a result of false and inadmissible application of provision about the base. If only truth was a decisive condition in case of an origin of language, and collecting designations of subjects, people were satisfied only certainty, - then thus we could tell that: "the stone is solid" as though the word "solid" designates something absolute, but not our absolutely subjective sensation!" [2, p. 3].
As for Avenarius in his opposition to an objective truth (which is denied by him) of value of cognition by the principle of the smallest expenditure of forces: "If the basis of theoretical apperceptions … consists in principle of the smallest measure of forces, the influence of the latter should be affected in austerity execution of the process of apperception. It, undoubtedly, also is impacted that the sum of representations of apperceptions is brought to a minimum, necessary for apperceptions. At comparative-scientific consciousness the aspiration to be restricted in case of an apperception perhaps by smaller reproduction of representations is manifested in needs of unity and in the requirement avoiding all excessive." [3, §22], then this approach is connected to operation of the organism which is aimed to an economization of efforts, but it hasn't a direct bearing on dependence or independence from consciousness of things.
As we showed in the above-mentioned monograph "The person as the hologram", all things in beingness are being formed by a single consciousness through its own particles and in this respect depend on it, but also single consciousness depends on things, more precisely, - on the passive, inasmuch it forms not things, but their copies on the basis of Uniform, without which a single consciousness would have no "construction material".
Each individual consciousness also forms own direct surrounding, i.e. the surrounding, which falls within the scope of his sensations, but with the hidden help of single consciousness and certain change by it of the mechanism of perception of objects surrounding a living being by this being, so how the pause between the impulses from the sense organs to the processing centers of the living being in the form of packets of information in force of the physiological features of each organism - because of need of the refractive interval, or the interval recovering nerve fibers between impulses - drops out for consciousness: the human brain doesn't manage to fix it, due to the short duration of each pause.
Therefore, before each living being (consciousness) after processing of information packets by the appropriate centers arise the moving objects and they, thanks to the inertial mechanism of perception of these objects, in particularly, by the person, when separate impulses merge into a continuous stream, are considered by him as the objective reality which is given to him in the sensations although each copy is manifested originally as motionless.
Thus, reality as the "short-range layer", as if "shrouding" the person in the form of space, time and moving things, is "produced" by each individual consciousness through sensations of the person covertly from human self-consciousness, i.e., as if automatically thanks to unity of each individual consciousness and the cumulative (single) consciousness.
Otherwise, i.e. without time, space and moving things in so convenient and even a colourful type of the natural phenomena, any life, or events couldn't be for a person although a "primordial" holographic projection has absolutely other structure in which goes the process of high-frequency update of copies of all objects of a holography projection on the basis of Uniform with further formation, perhaps, except the measurement known to us, absolutely other measurements and patterns of beingness which are unavailable to the person from his three-dimensional measurement, but inside these measurements also time, space and moving things are available, inasmuch the information process of the formation of time by a single consciousness through the individual consciousnesses, more precisely, the living beings, means formation of space together with it, as well as the copies of things in it, which for each individual consciousness in the carrier corresponding to him, acquire motion due to the prolapse in the human consciousness of a pause between positions of copying of things.
It is also necessary to mark, that inasmuch copying of things in case of each update of a holographic projection of Uniform is carried out sequentially based on what is available in a projection, but with high frequency, in so far as the changes of copies of things in case of each impulse are insignificant and bound to previous forms in a holographic projection. As a result, in each individual consciousness (the living beings) the high-frequency update is reflected eventually not by the chaotic, but orderly processes of change and motion of the objects of beingness with compliance of the principle of causality (ibid.).
The term "existence" together with the prefix "co" (co-existence) each person intuitively understands as the events, and if to think further, "the event" is happening to someone or to something in some space and in some time. But division of beingness on time, space and movement of things in it happens only in consciousness of the person, and we watch this partitioned beingness personally.
However, we know nothing about something, being situated outside our sensations, i.e., what we sense. Therefore, it is reasonable to ask: is there anything outside of consciousness (sensations)? After all, beingness is "enlivened" only by the presence of the living and the term "beingness" means the being of someone in something. Thus, meaning of beingness as receptacles of things, apparently, consists in "a service" to the live, which watches, acts, i.e., not necessarily of a person, but surely - consciousness, which in the highest expression possesses not only ability to feel in own carrier, but - also the by ability to understand, and including oneself.
If mentally to exclude consciousness, "having left" beingness as a repository of things alone in the residue, it becomes as a non-existence. What's the difference, there is something there or not? All the same anybody isn't present there. If, on the contrary, to exclude the things, having left consciousness in loneliness, it at once loses life – there are no things, time, space, motion, – there are no and the existence as such, so as consciousness loses a support and along with that - resistance of something, and without all of this it isn't present a subject neither for sensations, nor for speculations, nor for actions. In other words, beingness doesn't exist out of consciousness, and consciousness is incapable to exist without things, what means the indissolubility of beingness and consciousness in the basis, i.e. - their unity. Means, in the basis - out of time, or in infinity, they make organic whole, and they can be designated as Uniform. It is necessary only to find out the way of their "output" from eternal and infinite Uniform, i.e., to try to come nearer to the truth which is secret of Creation.
Thus, the role of consciousness in beingness, which is the derivative from a holographic projection of Uniform, consists in the changing of the passive objects in beingness, which boomerangs into the changing of consciousness oneself in its own carriers; the very same Uniform is steady, containing in itself everything, to which consciousness can address for maintenance of functioning of its own projection; from this it follows that one is connected with another. (See, for example, the monograph "The person as the hologram". Nizovtsev Y. M. Website www.litres.ru).
Heidegger tried to understand this in application to the person. He declared the following: "… Dasein itself has a "Being-in-space" of its own but this in turn is possible only on the basis of Being-in-the world in general." [4, p. 82].
Heidegger was also able to imagine that without motion, more precisely, in our interpretation - without the conversion of the process of updating of copies of things inside a holographic projection in movement in the human consciousness, - the world would remain hidden for the person and by no understood by him: "If beingness-in-a world is a basic state of Dasein, in what it moves not only in general, but pre-eminently in the mode of everydayness, then this should always be felt ontically. A total missing in invisibility would be incomprehensible, moreover, Dasein has an existential understanding of itself, no matter how undetermined it may function. But no sooner was the “phenomenon of knowing the world” grasped, it immediately fell under the "external", formal interpretation. The evidence for this is the procedure (still customary today) of setting up knowing as a “relation between subject and Object” – a procedure in which there lurks as much “truth” as vacuity. Subject and Object do not coincide both with Dasein and with the world.” [4, p. 86-87].
Without the internal, i.e., without consciousness in a person, beingness for a person, as well the cognition, is absent - about this Heidegger also ponders: “If one reflects upon this relationship of Beingness, an entity called “Nature” is given proximally as that which becomes known. Knowing, as such, is not to be met in this entity. If knowing “is” at all, it belongs solely to those entities which know. But in those entities, human-Things knowing is not present-at-hand. In any case, it is not externally ascertainable as, let us say, bodily properties are. Now in as-much as knowing belongs to these entities and is not some external characteristic, it must be “inside””. [4, p. 87].
Any living being senses the world in own way, according to the sense organs which it possesses. This fact is realized by Heidegger and he raises a question about the possible subjectivity of the world: “Is “world” perhaps a characteristic of Dasein's Beingness? And in this case, does every Dasein “proximally” have its world? Does not “world” thus become something “subjective”. How, then, can there be a “common” world “in” which, nevertheless, we are? And if we raise the question of the “world”, what world do we have in view? Neither the common world nor the subjective world but the world-hood of the world as such. But what avenue do we meet this phenomenon?” [4, p. 92].
Without knowing about the true structure of Creation, about "mechanism" of its functioning, Heidegger can't answer the last question, apart statements about a polysemy of the world, its diversity that in itself is banality.
Knowledge of any subject can't be gained in full so as it is possible to go deep into it infinitely. So, the truth for the person can have only essence character on the appropriate thresholds of knowing.
However, truth depends, but not on the person, as such, truth depends by his consciousness, that not same, so as consciousness can exist and without the human body, inasmuch consciousness too is the material formation, receiving nevertheless the organs of senses in a person. Exactly a single consciousness forms through the organs of senses of each person his "now", i.e. - all human world.
Therefore all manifesting for us (beingness) originally is for the person at all not accordance of knowledge of the reality, so as knowledge, as such, still isn't present, but it is the compliance to sensations after their processing by consciousness with the advent of the spatial-temporal changing picture of life, or the current "now", formed by consciousness by means of sensations of the carrier of consciousness with direct support of a single consciousness on the basis of the passive in irreversible sequence. This process is characteristic not only for a person, but also for any living being, and it occurs automatically, more precisely, outside the comprehension of this process by a person. "The person as the hologram". Nizovtsev Y. M. Website www.litres.ru).
Only this process of formation of "now" of any living being can be considered, but only hypothetically, by the fundamental truth of existing for all living beings, more precisely, - its essence. But the person doesn't stop, unlike others living beings, on this "picture". He, as the being, which understands himself, with unmeasurable needs and the infinite, more precisely, intransient aspirations, wishes to learn the world and to improve the life, for what he willy-nilly should penetrate into essence of things, "extracting" from them at each level this or that truths, naturally, - the relative, or adequate only for this level. Passing different levels in cognition the being, understanding himself, broadens thereby own horizons, defines stability in things and in their order under different conditions and anyway changes the own life, and, so, changes the own consciousness.
Partially Husserl understood this, but he didn't find the best solution as soon as to ascribe full truth to the timeless: “Any truth is not a fact, i.e., aught as determinate into time. Truth, however, may have meaning that a thing exists, that there is available some state, some change occurs, etc., but truth itself is above any temporary, i.e., not meaningful to ascribe to it the temporary being, occurrence or destruction.” [5, p. 55].
However, the timeless is the infinite, eternal Uniform, which contains everything potentially, but Uniform can manifest only in time, and not by itself. Therefore, this consideration of Husserl characterizes him as the idealist believing in existence of the intelligible, the ideal, the incorporeal, but all it is possible to carry only to a non-existence or imaginations of religious consciousness.
Truth belongs to concepts by means of which human consciousness tries to estimate authenticity of the events in order to not to wallow in illusions, the false, different distortions of information that inevitably leads to the death. In fact, therefore the aspiration to truth, doing possible existence of human communities is characteristic for human consciousness. And all events can happen only in time, even, apparently, the mathematical outputs and proofs, distracted from beingness.
Truth – not a determinacy of beingness and not a condition of beingness as Husserl supposes, shifting "center of gravity" on beingness. On the contrary, the beingness, surrounding us, or existing in general is defined by a single consciousness, but "beingness" surrounding any individual consciousness, or its "now" is determined by each individual consciousness by the steps of own development, each of which leads consciousness to comprehension of essences at this level of beingness; in other words, - leads consciousness to understanding by him of not many steady positions, regularities, connecting the being objects at that level, which consciousness reached - that means the comprehension by him of truths of this level of beingness.
Truth is equivalent of beingness to consciousness in experience, confirmed in every case by successes of consciousness in the use of beingness, exactly by this condition truth is determined, and comes out into own existence. Therefore, truth corresponds to a level of development of consciousness and in this sense, it is relative and truth can actually be equated to essence of the certain level and conditions of beingness, in which it is comprehended.
Numerous definitions of concept of truth affects only its separate sides, but doesn't penetrate into its sense. inasmuch classical definition of truth, in which the main criterion of truth is identity of thinking and beingness, rests against the fuzzy concepts "thinking" and "beingness" which yet should be brought into accord somehow.
Nevertheless, to truth anyway only consciousness can come, "having looked" at itself, at the surrounding and, further selecting subjects, to try to bring into accord with own intentions these subjects, most likely, changing them in own highest expression, than adapting of oneself under them.
Therefore, truth in the course of cognition is always specific and depends on the level of knowledge and ability to apply them, i.e. it is checked by practice, as a rule, and only limited is checked by favor so how seeming pragmatically superfluous and even unwanted for this moment of knowledge and skills can "flip" the world in the sequel, whereas the aspiration to benefit, to satisfaction of the desires, determined only by conviction (belief) is downfall of the person up to level of "consumption" only the useful that is similar to the animal adaptation to the environment instead of its conversion, and it leads eventually to degradation of the person. So that Pierce too narrows concept of truth: "A true proposition is a proposition belief in which would never lead to such disappointment so long as the proposition is not understood otherwise than it was intended.” [6, p.242-257].
Another definition of "the father" of pragmatism Peirce pertaining to truth: “Consider what effects that might conceivably have practical bearings you conceive the object of your conception to have. Then your conception of those effects is the WHOLE of your conception of the object.” [7, p. 331-346] proposes to take into account all "conceivably practical".
Here, too, it appears a insufficiency of two types: the practical today may seem by one circle of things, tomorrow - another, that introduces uncertainty in the concept of the object, which also can be seen from an unexpected quarter - so appear inventions; besides, the practical is nevertheless mostly the useful, the utilitarian, excluding imagination, flight of thought, "mad" ideas, which are capable to change radically our life, and really changed it, especially for the last decades.
Truth in accordance with the growth of knowledge and practical application changes its appearance so how human consciousness goes from essences of one level to essences which are deeper. And in this sense truth corresponds to essences revealed.
Here it is possible to agree with Lenin V. I., which declared: “For the materialist the “success” of human practice proves the correspondence between our ideas and the objective nature of the things we perceive.” [1, chapter 1.2]; with the amendment that "the objective nature of things," initially no, because things, which are independent of consciousness, are not exist - all of them, or rather their copies are formed by consciousness in accordance with its form-building capabilities and these copies are "given" to a person for his life and development, in the course of which evolves and changes his consciousness itself, which acquires a "transient" independence in each life of individual consciousness. Therefore, only for a individual consciousness in a person, which is "clipped" one-sided from a single consciousness, all things become independent of him during his lifetime, but they acquire motion, changes exactly in order that he could overcome the resistance of this environment, consisting out of things and other people with their own individual consciousnesses competing with him, and "to compel" things to "obey" to him. "The person as the hologram". Nizovtsev Y. M. Website www.litres.ru).
Except of the practice, the stability can be criterion of truth. The stability is expressed in a number of logical deductions, virtually no checking, but based on known laws.
One cannot deny touch to truth of and by means of intuition, i.e. as the process of finding truth without the intermediate steps from the first principle to whom may be just aught appearing, inasmuch human consciousness cannot penetrate into "space" from where is taken all, that appear.
Hobbes and Berkeley till Husserl have understood this situation with the relation of sensations (consciousness) and things.
Hobbes detaches the sensations with all their derivatives from objects, generated in us by the sensations: “And though at some certain distance, the real and very object seem invested with the fancy it begets in us; yet still the object is one thing, the image or fancy is another.” [8, p. 1-2].
Separation by Thomas Hobbes sensations and objects, in essence, was the basis for the ideas of Berkeley, consisting in the fact that without existence of senses and reason existence of everything else is problematic, because nothing and no one perceive it.
Berkeley believes the existence of things only due to their perception by the human mind, or his soul, inasmuch there is no evidence of separate existence of things outside human sensations: “XXIII. But say you, surely there is nothing easier than to imagine Trees, for instance, in Park, or Books existing in a Closet, and no Body by to perceive them, I answer, you may so, there is no difficulty in it: But what is all this, I beseech you, more than framing in your Mind certain ideas which you call Books and Trees, and the same time omitting to frame the Idea of any one that may perceive them? But do not you yourself perceive or think of them all the while? This therefore is nothing to the purpose: It only shews you have the Power of imagining or forming Ideas in your Mind; but it doth not shew that you can conceive it possible, the Objects of your Thought may exist without the Mind: To make out this, it is necessary that you conceive them exist unconceived or unthought of, which is a manifest Repugnancy.” [9, p. 18].
To such extreme, like Berkeley, Husserl does not come, but he joins to Hobbes and Berkeley in that thought, that the contemplation of the primary source, that is, represented through sensations, is the true source of knowing: “No conceivable theory can make us err with respect to the principle of all principles: that every originary presentive intuition is a legitimizing source of cognition, that everything originarily (so to speak, in its “personal” actuality) offered to us in “intuition” is to be accepted as what it is presented as being but also only within the limits in which it is presented there. We see indeed that each theory can only again draw its truth itself from originary data. Every statement which does no more than confer expression on such data by simple explication and by means of significations precisely conforming to them is, as we said at the beginning of this chapter actually an absolute beginning called upon to serve as a foundation a principium in the genuine sense of the word.” [10, p. 44].
Along with that, Husserl, in fact, if truth is adequate to what we call essence, considers that truth is unattainable in full, i.e., as the absolute: “The specific character of certain categories essences is such that essences belonging to them can be given only “onesidedly”, but “many-sidedly” - only in a sequence of the moments, yet never “all-sidedly”.” [10, p. 8].
Hume treats truth as compliance of thinking to sensations of the person: “We perceive only properties of those forces which are available to senses." [11, p. 22]; “They are the successive perceptions only, that constitute the mind; nor have we the most distant notion of in place, where these scenes are represented, or of the materials, of which it is composed.” [11, p. 253].
In its considerations Hume accurately catches that circumstance that theprimordial source of Whole for the human consciousness are namely sensations. In this respect he is quite right, because it is through the sense information comes into control centers of consciousness of the person. Hume also is right in his doubt about existence and qualities of the things which are beyond the senses. Here he is certainly consistent in their views and findings, and differs from other thinkers in that does not take the responsibility to determine aught unknown to him, to speculate on the basis which is impenetrable for him.
However, Hume, like most of thinkers, concentrates the attention not on consciousness, and on the person, and this circumstance, naturally, leads him to not quite adequate conclusions: "… on what base we should think that the same forces will be always combined with the same felt qualities. Therefore, the principal in life is not the mind, but a habit. Only it forces mind in all cases to assume that the future corresponds to the past. How easy did not seem this step, mind never for all eternity would not be able to make it." [11, p. 22]
One can hardly argue with Hume that experience, the habit generated on its basis that is an important factor in human life, the more that Hume rightly pointed out existence of many forces, unknown to us, that involves for the person a support preferably on known and clear to him.
Nevertheless, here Hume pulls together the highest consciousness inherent in the person, with the lowest consciousness, inherent in all other living beings. The living beings without self-consciousness, that is, not aware of themselves in time and unable, therefore, it is expedient and creatively reformat their own surrounding, really only adapts to the environment by trial and error, accumulating over many generations of genetic memory that allows them to coexist satisfactorily with the environment and to struggle with competitors on the basis of accumulated experiences and genetic memory. But all this doesn't allow living beings without self-consciousness to raise above the environment - in a result, essential change of the environment leads to death of the whole types.
In contrast to the lowest consciousness, unique to all living beings, except for a person, the highest consciousness of a person is characterized primarily not by mind, which is inherent in all living things in one form or another as centers that process information, incoming from the sensations, but by awareness of yourself itself, which implies not just the adoption of the information from sensations and more or less adequate reaction to it, but and the subsequent conscious, that is, expedient change of everything that manifests before him and in him.
For this purpose, the consciousness in the person has a set of means: imagination, extensive databases, various types of communication - from speech to written, thinking of all its forms, purposeful skilled verification of the arriving information, formulation and consolidation of regularities, deduced on the basis of experience and logical processing of information, aspirations for the new, the unknown, producing upheavals in life on the basis of inventions and utilization of fundamental discoveries, etc.
Therefore, the habit - characteristic only for the layman, who muffles aspirations of own consciousness to the unknown, who prefers to live within already the tested, but not for the creative consciousness, who always seeks to overcome any circumstances at any cost.
Following Berkeley, Avenarius, denying existence independent of human consciousness reality, believes in this regard that truth is not compliance of consciousness to objective reality, but it is a result of coincidence of the perception of the majority, consistency of data, aspiration to integrity of system of data or as the coherence of sensations: “Here we only noted aspiration for a higher unity, because in it lurks the aspiration to think in the concept of a coherent whole. We could note this fact and on dualism, so as after all its division of the world into two opposites testifies to the thinking, which is addressed to integer; but we thought that the aspiration to finite, higher unity better expresses the need thinking of the totality of things, as understood." [3, §39]; “The final result of our analysis concurs—although not absolutely (durchgehend) in the measure of the various points of view—with that reached by other investigators…” [12, p. 120].
These arguments of Avenarius suffer from one-sidedness, since it is foolish to assert that the perception of most researchers is able to point to the truth without the successful application of the obtained analytical data in practice.
Hegel also joins the aforementioned thinkers in relation to the absolute truth. If we recall the definition of the absolute, which has given Hegel, namely: “The absolute is the unity of subjective and objective ... whereas in fact subjective and objective after all not only are identical but also different.” [13, p. 116], then the absolute neither in the current life, nor in thinking can't be.
In terms of the interaction of consciousness and things, recognized by consciousness, process of deepening of consciousness in the thing depends on the level of consciousness, which can understand the essence of a thing only in accordance with this level, moving ahead, for example, from the general concepts "heat" and "cold" to laws of molecular motion in different environments.
Therefore, it is inadequate to consider that each step in the knowledge is the absolute truth, moreover it is possible to go deep into the thing infinitely not only because nobody knows its depth but also because consciousness itself changes "jumping" from one level of development on another where things appear before him in other appearance and obey to other regularities.
Perhaps that is why the oldest religion on Earth - Hinduism - stated: truth cannot be expressed because of its diversity.
And contemplative in its essence Buddhism, by contrast, thought that truth is revealed in front of each of your gaze.
It is difficult to object to both, since Hinduism notes a change in the essence of things over time in accordance with the accumulation of knowledge about the nature of things and a change in the consciousness of researchers, and Buddhism indicates that any one that appears, if it is manifested, always carries the essence of one kind or another.
Be that as it may, but the practical advance of mankind both in technical, and in moral the relations show that coincidence of aspirations of people with cognizable by them to the main natural and public regularities in refraction them to the solution of practical tasks lead actions of people to real achievements.
Means, the truth nevertheless exists, but only as the certain information about objects obtained in various ways, and it reveals in the current reality their special essence to subjects at a certain level of consciousness for their benefit, as well as for the application that develops them, and changing with the loss of this level.

Bibliography

1. Lenin V. I. Materialism and Empirio-Criticism. Collected Works. Progress Publishers, 1972. Moscow. V.14. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: Marxists.org>archive/Lenin… 1908/mec…
2. Nietzsche F. On Truth and Lies in extra moral sense. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: Nietzsche.ru/works/other/about-istina/
3. Avenarius R. Philosophie als Denken der Welt gemass dem Princip des kleisten Kraftmasses. Leipzig. Reisland. 1876.
4. Heidegger M. Being and Time. UK. This translation copyright © Blackwell Publisher Ltd. 1962. 0-631-19770-2 (pbk)
5. Husserl E. Logical investigations. V. 1. Prolegomena to pure logic. This paperback edition first published 2001 by Routledge. ISBN: 978-0-415-24189-8
6. Peirce. C. S. The Fixation of Belief. The Writings. Volumes I – VI. Vol. III. Indiana University. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.iupui.edu/-arisbe/menu/.../bycsp.HTM
7. Peirce C. S. What pragmatism is. The Essential Peirce 1 – 2. Vol. II. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.iupui.edu/-arisbe/menu/.../bycsp.HTM
8. Hobbes T. Leviathan. The English Works of Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury; New First Collected and Edited by Sir William Molesworth, Bart., (London; Bohn, 1839-45). 11 vols. Vol. 3. 12.09.2015. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: <http: / /oll.libertyfund.org/titles/
9. Berkeley G. A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge. Edited by D.R. Wilkins. Dublin. Reissue 1734. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.math.tcd.ie/.../Berkeley/HumanKnowled
10. Husserl E. Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy – First Book General Introduction to a Pure Phenomenology. Collected Works. Vol. II, 1976 [1913]. Kersten F., trans. The Hague. Nijhoff. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.dhspriory.org/kenni/…/Husserl/Ideas1.pd.
11. Hume D. Philosophical Essays Concerning Human Understanding. London. The copytext is the 1777 edition. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.david hume.org/
12. Avenarius R. Der menschliche Weltbegriff. Leipzig. Reisland. 1891.
13. Hegel G. Works of Hegel, Volumes: 13. Vol. I. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: http/www.logos.com/