No one has ever known a lick of truth in their entire life.

The flaw in your definition is that it is a lie. Personal belief does not constitute fact. There is an IS. What that means is that there is a truth within the whole spectrum of the universe and everything else is a lie. I can say that the president is made of jelly beans and believe it in my whole heart that he is, but does that therefore mean he is? Absolutly not. It can easily be disproven and will be somehow. He could be, and we do not realize it, but until then it is a lie. The only way that real truth can be discovered is if no one in the entire universe and beyond cannot disprove it any way, at any point, in any way at all. I can say the grass is green, but while there is someone who can show that I'm wrong, regardless of the time or place or way they are in or are at or do, then I will be saying a lie in the whole spectrum of things. This, it is not my burden, as you say, to prove everything is false, as everything already has or will be some how at some place in some time in some way. No, my friend, the burden is cast on you to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that everything is true. The grass is green must apply to every being, everywhere, at every time, in every way for it to be true. Not a single being, including a diety of some kind assuming there is one, can be able to prove you wrong for it to be actual truth. Until that time, everything else is a lie. The true truth is the only truth, everything else is merely a fantazm the one has convinced themself is the truth. I say this agruement is a lie because I have not, and cannot show beyond a shadow of a doubt that what I'm saying is the absolute truth because someone can argue with me that it's not. LIkewise, what you are sayng is a complete lie because you have not shown me beyond any measure of doubt that what your saying is true. Someone will prove me wrong, and someone will prove you wrong some how, some way, some where, at some time. Either of us may have come reasonably close to finding the real truth, but the simple fact is that we didn't. Thus, what both of us are saying is complete bunk, or a lie. Neither of us knows the real truth (my definition), we are just convinced that we do (your definition) which proves my argument to be right, although it is a lie. You yourself said that when you debate amoung your friends that one of you agree, thus you are all wrong, and all telling lies. None of you proved yourself so that none of the rest of you could disagree, so none of you found the real truth, even if you came close. Until it is absolute, it is a lie. This is why I brought up my :) example. You may believe that it is a smiley face, but the fact is it is not. It is an illusion of one, your own interpretation of something that has a much deeper and more right meaning. We get closer when we say it is a semi colon and an end parenthasis, but we're still not there, because someone else can prove that it is just pixels, thus niether a smiley face nor a simicolon/end parenthesis. It will continue to be like this until someone finds the true, definite meaning of what :) is, to the point where no one, at anytime/place/way can ever prove it wrong. Every other explanation is a lie that we think is the truth, although it is not. Thus none of us really has known a lick of truth ever. Thank you for this debate, although everything you said to me was a lie. Everything I said is also a lie, so excuse me for that. To the reader: in summary, what we think we know is not what really is. I think I'm right, he thinks I'm wrong. There is a right answer, and thus there is a wrong one. What really is is. But I implore you to vote not on personal feelings, but to the person who proved their lie better.