To conclude from the observation of our colored spectacles, our disparate perspectives, that we are somehow incapable of comprehending objective truth, is first a self-contradictory claim—to say that knowledge of A precludes knowledge means we cannot have knowledge of A to begin with—and secondly, I think it an unmerited conclusion. It is a bad conclusion, I think, because it avoids the much more terrifying implications. Knowing that each of us sees the world with our own eyes, hears with our own ears, and in the end each of us creates a simplified extrapolation of the real world, means that we do not own the truth, either individually or collectively. As a favorite book of mine opens: “No live organism can continue for long to exist sanely under conditions of absolute reality; even larks and katydids are supposed, by some, to dream.” Truth is more complex than a mathematical or scientific statement, more complex than mere fact. A person can own a fact, can know what they perceive or think, but truth is not like that. Some take this realization and conclude that there is no real truth, or that truth is impossible for us to have. That is absurd. Truth is not something lower than facts, but greater. As such, it takes something greater than mere observation to know truth, one must believe it. Just because we have imperfect knowledge, does not mean we have no knowledge; just because our reflection is dim does not mean that what can now be seen is untrue, nor does it imply that we will never see more clearly.