Our life always expresses the result of dominant thoughts. That's why people demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use.
via Dedy N. Hidayat
One of the things I agree with Kierkegaard is his idea that truth is in subjectivity. He also admits that this attempt is not scientific. That truth is not objective.
I read truth as a peacefully resolved dialogue with(in) ourselves. Be it belief in a Supreme Being, faith, religion, or simply trying to understand life. Kiekegaard's, or the existentialism, line of thought is in agreement with Descartes' 'I think therefore I am'.
We think. It's what differs us from other species. In science, 'truth' can be found inductively or deductively. In deductive logic, one tries to prove a theory by means of empirical evidence - objective reasoning. In inductive logic, truth is found through observation, and furthermore theorisation. In Islam, it's the first verse of the Quran. 'Read', which is a concept that is repeated in other verses, such as 'those who are able to read the signs'.
I choose to search for truth subjectively. Through observation and thinking. Making sense of the signs that pre-exist. And in subjective truth, there is no concept of true and false, but valid or invalid.
In this logic, since it is not objective, I will never be entitled to say 'Saya lebih benar, karena...'. Because what is subjective could always be argued against.
I don't claim to be an existentialist. Neither am I claiming that what I believe in is truism for every human being. I don't think any of us will ever be equipped to claim that. I do however, find a resolve for my inner dialogue answered in the sentence 'For me my truth, and for you, yours.'