According to the truth, in Santo Tomás, it is configured as the relation of adequacy of the thing and the intellect. But the truth is the intellect necessary?
Assuming the unexpected, at the exact moment when something unexpected happens, where is the truth? An event, is it true only if someone decides it is true?
If a fact is only true if it is defined by the intellect, then it will never be true. It is impossible for man to know all the points of past and present and correspondence, to define the complete truth about something.
At this point truth cannot actually exist in the human intellect. If the truth is impossible to be in the human intellect, by the limitation of the intellect. So truth can only exist outside the human intellect, and that intellect tries to capture part of this truth.
But the truth is only really true when all the points of truth are known, which is impossible for human beings. So the truth only exists in the complexity of all existing factors in the universe, and their correlations. They occur in the sum of all past and present actions, determining the future.
Understanding part of the truth of the past, and the present, makes it possible to predict the future. The more you know the facts, the more you can predict the future.
Thus, the truth cannot be in the human intellect, because if that were the case, future decisions would not depend on past and present factors.
It is therefore necessary to know part of the truth that the intellect cannot correlate, so that part of what is observed is known.
So the truth cannot exist as the adequacy of the thing by the intellect, since knowing that the intellect cannot absorb all knowledge related to "thing", then it will never really be true.
So what you can do is try to get closer to the truth. That way we can be closer to the truth or further away from the truth.
Thus the law of gravity was defined as discovered by Isaac Newton. Physical science determines that something is discovered, that is, it exists, but was not known. But is Isaac Newton's law of gravity correct?
According to the newest analyses, gravity manages a variation of time, and thus the law of gravity defined by Isaac Newton is not as true as the truth defined by gravity discovered by Albert Einstein is.
Thus, Einstein's concept of truth is closer to the truth than the truth defined by Isaac Newton. Truth exists regardless of whether human beings consider it true or not.
At one time in history, the concept of truth defined that the earth was at the center of the universe. Galileo Galilei defined by mathematical observations and calculations that the earth was not the center but the sun was at the center.
But Catholicism's leadership defined by its concept of truth that the universe defined by Galileo was false, and that Galileo should deny its truth. Even in public Galileo defining against his truth, but Galileo's correlation being the most rational, then we have that the truth in Galileo's concept was closer to the truth than the truth in Catholicism's concept.
After Galileo, we have Johaness Kepler who defined the orbits of the planets in elliptical ways, and so knowledge was coming closer to the truth.
So truth is a path that man seeks to reach, but he can never reach. But the closer you are to the truth, the more others who are far away will be adding more lies.
Thus, the more rationally proven concepts are in a concept, the closer it will be to the truth, in relation to another that has fewer rationally proven concepts.
So truth cannot be a relationship between the thing and the intellect, for this relationship can never be true, but rather an attempt to obtain the truth.
In fact, no individual can define having the truth, but having the closest logical proximity to the truth known.
Any individual, whoever he may be, who says that he knows the Truth will automatically be lying, for the truth is impossible to be contained by human knowledge.
