Aunty Flo
My great aunty Flo broke her arm and died.
It is true that she broke her arm in 1923. It is also true that she died in 1949. But there is no cause and effect relationship between these 2 events. The only connection between these events is that they appear in the same sentence.
That is a simple illustration of how the acccurate and honest reporting of two truths is not the whole truth.
Britain's involvement in the slave trade Now let's look at a more complex and current example. [1] Great
Britain was heavily involved in the slave trade in the 17th and 18th
Centuries and British traders were responsible for the exporting of 3.2 million African
slaves between 1660 and 1807. [2] The industrial expansion of that
period benefited from the profits from that trade and thus modern
Britain is the direct beneficiary of this trade. [3] The endemic and
systemic anti-black racism in contemporary British society is the
result of the "white supremacism" used to justify the enslavement of
blacks in that period. [4] White British people need to understand
their racial colonisalist history, apologise for it, make reparation
through a process of cultural decolonisation and in some situations via
financial reparation. This is a very brief summary of the truths and position of "Black Lives Matter", "Rhodes Must Fall" and many others who embrace and espouse the current historical revisionism we are experiencing in the UK at time of writing. Before we go any further let me place on record that in my view slavery of any people anywhere, at any time from the past to the present is abhorrent and a crime against humanity. Similarly, racism in all its shapes and forms, and however prevalent in UK society or any other country or culture, is totally unacceptable. The statements in points one and two above are facts and therefore true. The extrapolations, and beliefs based on those extrapolations, expressed in points three and four above are opinions and do not reflect the whole truth. It's beyond the scope of this article to provide detailed analysis of the history of British involvement in the slave trade, but suffice it to say that:

___________
Orientation Note
This article does not attempt to define truth, prescribe beliefs, or assert philosophical authority.
Its purpose is to equip the reader with practical epistemic tools for navigating claims, uncertainty, and competing assertions in a world saturated with information and confidence.
Truth, in this context, is treated as something approached through testing, revision, and humility - not possessed or declared.
The aim here is not to tell you what to believe, but to strengthen your capacity to evaluate claims, question certainty, and decide responsibly for yourself.
A partial truth is a fact that is true but is a fragment of the whole truth.
3 reasons why the whole truth is often not told
Why does all this matter?
One of the key themes of this site is about learning how to think effectively, and this matters because, over the long term, the outcomes that you experience throughout your life are determined by two critical factors:
These influences include: your upbringing, the political environment you live in, popular culture, mainstream media, social media and the prevailing ideologies.
Many of the things that happen in your life are random and beyond your control.
Many of the influences to which you are exposed fall into the category of partial truths masquerading as the whole truth. Obviously you can't control these influences.
The long term cumulative and compounding impact of your choices can have a major effect on your health, wealth and happiness.

How do we establish what is truth? How do we know whether an idea, a theory or a belief [or in fact anything] that is presented as the truth really is the whole truth rather than a partial truth masquerading as the whole truth?
I have set out below a checklist which you can apply to see whether you are dealing with the whole known truth or a partial truth masquerading as the whole truth.
But first I want to set out the context and background to that checklist.
Please note: When I use the phrase "the whole truth" I am referring to "the whole known truth" at any particular point in time, which may superceded with future discoveries.
Karl Popper: The Line Between Science and Pseudoscience
The scientific philosopher Sir Karl Popper (1902-1994), was interested in the same problem and offered a solution. He was considering this in relation to science and what he referred to as "pseudo-science", but the principles he outlined apply to our challenge and we can equate science as the whole truth and pseudo-science as partial truth.
In the early 20th century a number of new and exciting theories were all the rage and this was at the same time that Albert Einstein was setting out his theory of relativity.
He became concerned that Marxism and Freud and Adler's psychological theories did not meet the same standard of proof as Einstein's theory of relativity. In Popper's own words:
"It was during the summer of 1919 that I began to feel more and more dissatisfied with these three theories–the Marxist theory of history, psychoanalysis, and individual psychology; and I began to feel dubious about their claims to scientific status. My problem perhaps first took the simple form, ‘What is wrong with Marxism, psycho-analysis, and individual psychology? Why are they so different from physical theories, from Newton’s theory, and especially from the theory of relativity?’ I found that those of my friends who were admirers of Marx, Freud, and Adler, were impressed by a number of points common to these theories, and especially by their apparent explanatory power. These theories appeared to be able to explain practically everything that happened within the fields to which they referred. The study of any of them seemed to have the effect of an intellectual conversion or revelation, opening your eyes to a new truth hidden from those not yet initiated. Once your eyes were thus opened you saw confirming instances everywhere: the world was full of verifications of the theory. Whatever happened always confirmed it. Thus its truth appeared manifest; and unbelievers were clearly people who did not want to see the manifest truth; who refused to see it, either because it was against their class interest, or because of their repressions which were still ‘un-analysed’ and crying aloud for treatment."
Popper's Line Of Demarcation

The justification for the theories of Marx, Freud and Adler were based on logical empiricism which can be summarised by saying that if we find enough supporting evidence for a theory that verifies it.
Popper compared and contrasted these theories against Einstein's Theory of Relativity, which made specific, verifiable predictions, giving the conditions under which the predictions could be shown false.
In other words, Einstein subjected his theory to scientific method, and as we now know:
Einstein’s predictions were proved to be true when tested.
One of Einstein’s crucial predictions was that light’s path would be bent by strong gravitational fields, and during an eclipse one would be able to measure the precise degree of curvature for light coming from stars located behind the solar disk.
Astronomers Arthur Eddington and Frank Dyson conducted a study of the solar eclipse of May 29, 1919, which provided the key insight. The measured curvature more closely aligned with Einstein’s theory than the predictions of classic Newtonian gravity thus verifying the theory through attempts to falsify it.
What is truth? Popper's conclusions
Please note: I am well aware of the various criticisms of Popper's demarcation criteria in the field of science. But for purposes of establishing a working model for differentiating partial truth from the whole truth it stands until superceded by a better one!
Further Reading:
Karl Popper: The Line Between Science and Pseudoscience
Confirmation Bias - Seeing What You Want To See
Why You Should Embrace Anomalies – The Value Of Disconfirming Evidence
The Failure Of Cancel Culture - It's Suppression Not Engagement
Reframing History - Deconstruction And Discussion Not Destruction
Return from "What Is Truth" to: Mental Models - Help You Think Effectively
Or to: Walking The Talk
LATEST ARTICLES
Reduce Digital Overthinking To Lower Your Constant Inner Noise
Why Constant Micro-Stimulation Increases Your Internal Noise. Modern digital life generates a level of mental activity that previous generations never had to deal with, and this is fundamentally why w…Pausing Before You Act - Make It a Meta-Habit
How A Tiny Moment Unlocks Clarity, Choice, And Self-Leadership. There is a moment in life so subtle you barely register it. A colleague questions your idea. A notification flashes. A moment of uncerta…How to Interrupt Emotional Spirals Using Thought-Awareness
The spiral is fueled by your mind believing the story your thoughts tell. No one sets out to be swept away by a surge of emotion. One second you’re handling life, and the next, your mind has broken in…Universal Awareness and the Machinery of Thought
You Can’t Control Thoughts - But You Can Learn To See Them. Why do our thoughts have so much power over us - and how do we reclaim clarity? The foundation of thought-awareness is the ability to see yo…Rewiring Your Autopilot – How To Harness Your Subconscious Mind
How to harness your subconscious mind and move from passenger to pilot. The case for rewiring your autopilot is that most of what drives your thoughts, reactions, and decisions happens below your cons…Why You Need To Be Intimate With Your Own Thinking
How self-awareness and insight transforms delusion into wisdom. We live inside an invisible weather system - one made not of clouds and wind, but of thoughts - and this invisibilty is why you need to…The Illusion of Closeness in Always-On Relationships
Closeness that cannot survive absence was never intimacy - only constant stimulation mistaken for connection. We live inside an unprecedented experiment in human connection. For the first time in hist…Why Approval Feels Like Safety And Distance Feels Like Danger
Safety is not found in being approved - it appears when approval is no longer required. When approval feels like safety, connection stops being something we enjoy and quietly becomes something we rely…You Do Not Need Better Boundaries - You Need Clearer Thought
What no longer feels like your responsibility no longer crosses your boundaries. This article explains why you don’t need better boundaries - you need clearer thought - how modern life systematically…When Relationships Become Identity - Self-Worth is Based On Connection
Much of our relationship suffering comes from a subtle cognitive shift in which relationships become fused with identity. When relationships become identity, connection is no longer simply experienced…How Digital Communication Fuels Relationship Anxiety
Micro-Signals, Macro-Meaning. Modern relationships based on digital communication do not usually break down because of betrayal, cruelty, or lack of care. They fracture under the weight of interpretat…Why Absence Feels Like Rejection - Thought Patterns in Relationships
The mind doesn’t just experience absence. It interprets absence. You send a message. It’s casual. Nothing heavy. Maybe a question, maybe a light comment. Normally you’d get a reply within an hour or t…