benchmarking 'truth' to majority opinion is quite problematic. For one thing, you'd be asserting that a minority in possession of accurate facts had failed to grasp the truth of the matter, until their facts became common knowledge, meaning they weren't 'true' until they were believed.
Truth might as well be synonymous with common consensus, it has nothing to do with facts.
To use the Earth and Sun example again, when Galileo said "And yet [the Earth] moves."[1] he meant that truths and facts do not care for the other. The Church and the world-at-large might say the truth is the Sun orbits the Earth, but the fact is the Earth orbits the Sun.
this isn't what normal people mean when they say 'truth', usually they mean what you're referring to as 'facts.'
> he meant that truths and facts do not care for the other. The Church and the world-at-large might say the truth is the Sun orbits the Earth, but the fact is the Earth orbits the Sun.
Galileo meant that the truth of the matter doesn't care for public opinion.
The specific terms used aren't necessarily contrary to the point I am making.
What people consider as "truths" or "facts" (not actual facts but so-called "facts") have nothing to do with actual facts or reality at large.
>Galileo meant that the truth of the matter doesn't care for public opinion.
That can just as easily be rephrased as: Facts of the matter don't care for truths of the matter.