To what extent is truth different in mathematics, the arts, and ethics?

This is often elusive, but humans are constantly seeking the truth. For this purpose, when we seek the truth about the world around us, we are seeking knowledge and using knowledge as input to our knowledge, summarizing it into the domain of knowledge, the knowledge of this knowledge We provide a framework for. But I doubt the truth, what it is, how it is obtained, and how it changes among the fields of knowledge. The subject of this paper is the truth about knowledge, mathematics, art, and knowledge between morals.

The way to know art is different from ethics and mathematics. We use reasoning to understand mathematical and moral principles. But perception is a way to understand art. We see the art that leads us to experience. When you see art such as movies, statues, photographs, we become emotional. However, understanding the principles of ethics, we are not excited emotionally. "Without this work, I can not understand the content of artwork" (Lehrer, Kieran, Dominic 1)

The truth is as diverse and complex as human thoughts. It got different meanings in different areas of knowledge where I am asked to comment on mathematics, ethics and art in it. The truth of mathematics can be said to be the best logical reasoning in that it can be applied in practice. The truth of art is the treasure house of heritage and culture imagined by the creator of art form, the truth of ethics is the truth that connects people of the world, includes wisdom of empathy, and exists for generations to survive. Human being in harmony with dignity

Truth is usually defined as fact or reality. In further research, the truth is divided into differences according to the field of knowledge and problem. Sometimes we need more than one to prove the truth, but sometimes we only need one way to announce the facts. There are many arguments in various ways when you need to acquire knowledge. - John Gibbons' Truth in Behavior 'Summary: John Gibbons' attempt to prove similarities and differences between different incidents reveals the relevance of causal relationship attributes. Based on these considerations, Gibbons' main argument is that one person gives the real value of causality to his or her faith. This means that the true theory of deflation will be false.