>>>>>>>>Facts != Truth
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Hmm. So something can be a fact but not true?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>A set of facts, each individually true, may not sum up to the "truth".
>>>>>
>>>>>Can you give an example ?
>>>>
>>>>Fact: Israel has been bombing the Gaza
>>>>Fact: Those bombs have killed children
>>>>
>>>>What's the truth: Israel is a country of monsters who bomb the Gaza in order to kill children?
>>>>
>>>>Unless you have all the facts (and whoever does?), the facts you have don't necessarily add up to 'truth'.
>>>
>>>I fail to understand your argument (unless,of course, you are claiming that the third statement is the 'truth')
>>
>>The third statement is a 'truth' that might be gleaned from the facts presented. It illustrates the statement that you led you to want an example. If that's not what you want, then I don't understand what issue you're having with his statement.
>
>By definition a 'truth' must be true.
>The third statement can be no more than, at best, a supposition based on the two preceding facts.
>Stating that 'Facts != Truth' is the same as 'Truth != Facts' which is not possible - either it is not the truth or the facts are not facts.

Facts are true by definition. They can be combined to describe or explain a truth. However, if the presented facts are incomplete (i.e. some are missing) then so the truth being described will be at least partially false or incomplete. Even if all the facts are true and all available we are left with the problem of accepting / interpreting / understanding them objectively (not possible) in order to determine the truth. It's a complex issue which cannot be reduced to 'Facts != Truth' .