Truth is a kind of buoyancy certificate attached to a statement before it is tested in the local fish-bowl of scepticism. It is a property allocated to statements by various certification authorities according to their in-house set of criteria. It is a label of authenticity assuring any recipients of the communication that the statement does not contradict any other statement that the authority deems to be significant. If it conforms adequately, then an evaluation statement of 'truth' is issued. For example, a promotional claim by an underwater diving school that... 'diving is a healthy recreation'... would usually be issued without a specific associated evaluation statement asserting its truth. Only when some other authority challenges the statement with a different set of test criteria, will the diving school be obliged to specifically label the original statement as true and defend their position. Many other authorities might well deliver an opposing evaluation. Medical interests would take issue with the blanket health claim and warn of the possibly fatal effects of the bends. Meteorological organizations would remind the issuers of the statement of the serious consequences of ignoring the weather. Coast-guard authorities will demand caution with respect to hazardous tidal regions and dangerous submerged wrecks. Military interests would raise serious concerns about disregarding gazetted restriction zones and the less than healthy consequences of unauthorized violation. Ecological groups might take the opportunity to raise issue with respect to overfishing and the depletion of resources, since such activity would be unhealthy for the resources. Truth is allocated by various self appointed authorities entirely on the basis of self-interest and perspective.

Even the supposition that logic can determine truth or falsity is flawed. Logicians bypass the crucial decision as to the truth or falsity of a statement by assuming that it is either one or the other. They assume no middle ground. Yes or no, left or right, one or zero and nothing in between. Wondrous edifices are then constructed whereby intricate logical sequences can be designated as valid or not. All this is entirely irrelevant to gardeners, given the inability to establish the verified truth or otherwise of the original actual linguistic statements. It is just blatantly not the case that statements are either black or white with no shades in between.

In a world where considerable advantage is gained by deception and secrecy, ascertaining which statements convey information, accurately related to actual physical phenomena and circumstances, is of considerable survival value. Political propaganda reaps huge rewards to those promulgating it, in terms of acquiring significant quantities of the assets of a social group. The statement of an alibi is often the factor determining conviction or acquittal. A truth-label sewn on imitation designer clothing and stamped as 'authentic' only succeeds because of the reliability of human gullibility. 'Truth' is deception's counterfeit label of choice. Only the broadest criteria, driven by a vigorous and pragmatic scepticism, can hope to limit the claims of vested interest.

Truth is concerned with language and not with things, concepts or emotions. A statement constructed with concepts might have a truth-label but not the concepts themselves. It is entirely inappropriate to imagine that it is possible to have a 'true' concept of 'zero' or 'sex' or 'justice'. Neither can one have a 'false' hope.