Truth for nominalists, like traditional empirical scientists, are statements that can’t be falsified.
Truth for realists, like cladists and particle phycisists, are statements that can be verified.
It means that truth for nominalists are consistent statements that agree with facts, whereas truth for realists is anything. Truths for nominalists can thus not contradict each other, whereas truths for realists not only can, but actually do contradict each other (ie, my truth is not your truth).
It means that all nominalist truths are objective, whereas objective truths for realists must be something in the middle between their subjective truths. So, what is an objective truth between several contradictory subjective truths? Well, since subjectivity can’t be objective, this kind of truth must simply be the opposite to objective truth, that is, compromise.
Compromise is thus the kind of truth that realists, like cladists and particle physicists, practically search. They thus apparently believe that compromise can be found in the form of thing. Is it possible to confuse matters more than this? (Has anyone seen a clade or a scalar particle out there?)