A prelude to post-truth

Well, this post has been harder than usual to wrangle into shape.

The word I am currently exploring is post-truth and what it tells us about how we think about the word and concept truth. 

By 'we' I mean you and I (not so much philosophers or religious writers or scientists who write a lot about it!) So, I'm making some assumptions about how you think about truth. It may be wrong, but I have to.

As a prelude to the series, perhaps you could ponder how you think about this difficult concept. Then you will be ready to check and challenge my assumptions. 

Do you think of truth as a set of objective facts, a principle, a collection of slippery contestable ideas, one interpretation among many? Who decides what the truth is? Why do you think humanity needs to know the truth? How have you felt when what you had believed to be true is shown to actually be false? How do you think about some of the strange and discredited ideas that people believed to be true in the past?  Despite the recent flurry around relativism and the current palaver about post-truth, do you nevertheless continue to think - or feel - that truth exists? 

What does the word truth mean to you? And given that, how does the word post-truth relate to that idea. If you had to think of an image or picture for humanity's relationship to truth, what might that image be? 

So many questions.

That's what I've been exploring and drawing, among too many other things to get this finished. I've changed direction several times, as the concept of truth seems to resist close scrutiny.  

Essentially, I have no answers to the many questions, but I have got a nice picture. And a new, improved, and more useful metaphor for truth.

Hopefully I can share it soon, if the world will permit.