I'm not nearly as aristotelian as you might think, and I'm not really sure if the problem of defining "truth" is a product of aristotelian thought so much as a problem of thought and language in general.

The distinction I'm talking about is not whether any fact is true or not, but what it means to say that something is "true," and what kinds of lines should be drawn around it.  Can something be only a little true, or partly true, or are those inherent contradictions in terms?  It's been too long since I've had these arguments as my philosopher friend moved away, so I'm not fresh enough on the topic to flesh it out here.

Those may be irrelevant questions, and the pursuit of their answer a waste of time.  That's another issue entirely.