>"If truth is what any person thinks"
I did not say that; I said, "truth is exactly what you believe it to be!". Ah, I reviewed to make sure I quoted myself correctly and discovered "be" had become "me"!! A gross typo!
>If I make a statement and someone says "Is that true?" My response is usually either "I think so." or "That's what the evidence seems to indicate."
That is an entirely rational answer totally consistent with my definition; i.e., what you beleive is correct is truth to you!
>How are we to know what people think is true if we can't rely on what they say they think?
What makes you think you can rely on what they tell you!!
>Perhaps I am misunderstanding you.
I think you are!
>If truth has the definition you give for it then what do we call the ideal I'm referring to?
I say you are referring to exactly what I am referring to; my definition is just more thought out.
What should we call the objective ideal that is not subject to the individual observer?
The objective ideal "as you define it" does not exist, or, even if it does exist, it has no significance to us!!
>The unique addition about "you'll probably be wrong" is particularly interesting to me. >Did this come from your unique life's experiences?
If the ability to think came from my experiences; to me, it is a simple statement that the idea that "truth" is absolute and unchanging makes it, clearly and immediately, an impossible goal! When you apply that constraint, there is no truth!
>It promotes a more humble attitude about opinions, scientific or otherwise.
Everyone should recognize that most of what we think is opinion not fact. (I haven't defined what I mean by fact have I?)