Nothing is as it seems. What I know to be real, believe to be true built on my reliance on facts is apparently passe. It's official: Truth is dead.
The latest edition of the Oxford Dictionary has made it official. Post-truth now has an explanation: "objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief."
Of course, that definition is post-truth, so it may or may not be true. The Oxford Dictionary may be a propaganda tool written by the liberal media, the alt-right, conservative pundits, or some unknown Russian hacker.
And, therein lies the problem that has me scratching my head. If "truth" or "reality" are no longer what they have always been, how does one separate the wheat from the chaff? How does one construct a rational response to events when rationality is under attack?
Is Mars really populated by little green men (and women)? If enough people on the Internet claim it to be so, then does that makes it so? Did we go to the moon, or just stage a launch in a studio?
Is there a child sex ring being run from the basement of a pizza restaurant by a former presidential candidate? Is the fact that the restaurant doesn't have a basement relevant?
Is the government planning on installing microchips in our arms the next time we get a flu shot? Did Covid come from alien 5G signals? Is the earth flat, or round?
These examples are absurd, at least to me, but believed at some point in our history. They gained traction with our fellow citizens. No matter how bizarre or disconnected from how we think the world and its citizens operate, any statement has the potential to be accepted in a post-truth world.
So, how do you determine the difference between what is downright silly or ludicrous, and what are true, meaning facts with reality supporting the premise? At the risk of being seen as part of a plot to deceive, I offer the following suggestions:
1). If something seems too far-fetched to be true, then do your research rather than accept it as presented. Most of us agree that if something is too good to be true, like a Hawaiian vacation for $99, then it probably is a scam. Use that same discernment with news or "facts" that raise questions. Something important can be found in multiple sources, not just one that is re-tweeted or shared over and over.
2) Realize that truth or facts are not dependent on what you believe. They are independent of emotions and beliefs. An inconvenient truth is still true.
3) If someone claims to have a simple answer to a complex or difficult question that has bedeviled humans for a long time, question that solution. Complex problems do not have simple answers, especially those that can be summed up in a 280-character tweet or 30 second TV commercial.
4) Does the story attack a large non-specific foe, like Big Government, Republicans, all liberals, or The Media? Such broad-brush revelations are very rarely based on fact, but much more likely on emotion or a particular agenda.
5) Accept that uncomfortable "truths" may require you to change your worldview or opinions about something. To ignore or deny simply because you may have to change is done at your own peril.
6) "Truth" does not change over time: the world was flat for thousands of years until the truth of its roundness became obvious. The world was always round; people just didn't have the tools or mindset to accept it. What changes is our awareness and understanding of what is true, not the truths behind it.
With all that being said, I would add a suggestion: question everything. Just like the round world example, question what you believe at every turn. The "truth" as you know it may be wrong, or not fully understood. Be ready to adjust to new, credible, information.
So, how do you determine the difference between what is downright silly or ludicrous, and what are true, meaning facts with reality supporting the premise? At the risk of being seen as part of a plot to deceive, I offer the following suggestions:
1). If something seems too far-fetched to be true, then do your research rather than accept it as presented. Most of us agree that if something is too good to be true, like a Hawaiian vacation for $99, then it probably is a scam. Use that same discernment with news or "facts" that raise questions. Something important can be found in multiple sources, not just one that is re-tweeted or shared over and over.
2) Realize that truth or facts are not dependent on what you believe. They are independent of emotions and beliefs. An inconvenient truth is still true.
3) If someone claims to have a simple answer to a complex or difficult question that has bedeviled humans for a long time, question that solution. Complex problems do not have simple answers, especially those that can be summed up in a 280-character tweet or 30 second TV commercial.
4) Does the story attack a large non-specific foe, like Big Government, Republicans, all liberals, or The Media? Such broad-brush revelations are very rarely based on fact, but much more likely on emotion or a particular agenda.
5) Accept that uncomfortable "truths" may require you to change your worldview or opinions about something. To ignore or deny simply because you may have to change is done at your own peril.
6) "Truth" does not change over time: the world was flat for thousands of years until the truth of its roundness became obvious. The world was always round; people just didn't have the tools or mindset to accept it. What changes is our awareness and understanding of what is true, not the truths behind it.
With all that being said, I would add a suggestion: question everything. Just like the round world example, question what you believe at every turn. The "truth" as you know it may be wrong, or not fully understood. Be ready to adjust to new, credible, information.
It is not easy, it goes against human nature. But that is the only way we evolve as a species: to separate fiction from the truth, rejecting the former while embracing the latter.
Now that we are knee-deep in the alternate reality known as the American political season, this may be the perfect time to see if you can tell the difference between what is real and what is just convenient or comforting to believe. Your detective skills will be needed constantly for the next few weeks.
If you are really looking to become confused and irritated at the human tendency to believe pure silliness, read Off The Edge, a book about the Flat Earth belief system and its continued presence in the (round) world. I found this an eye-opening look into why we believe all sorts of bizarre conspiracy theories that treat truth and facts as irrelevant.
Be safe out there, people. Not everything is as it seems.
Be safe out there, people. Not everything is as it seems.
We taught our kids that there are three, not two, sides to every story - "his" side, "her" side and the truth. Take hearsay with a grain of salt until, through your own research, you find out what's really going on. That was our way of teaching them to think for themselves and not become head-nodding followers of anything or anyone. I think that helped our daughter, especially, navigate the drama of high school, and, now, helps her deal with the public in her career as a barber. I believe that a certain amount of cynicism and skepticism serve us well at any stage of life. Certainly, too much can lead to paranoia or other serious issues, but truth is something that often needs to be determined, not bandied about like yesterday's gossip.
ReplyDeleteIt amazes, and upsets me, that this post and comments like yours are even necessary. The approach you and Alan took with your daughter is what we tried to do with ours.
DeleteI don't have great faith in our schools to handle this task- not because of the teachers, but the outsized influence of politics and a small subset parents at the moment.
That subset of parents is trying to take over our local school board. I am hoping that the comment trend on the local FB page indicates there are more rational folks around, but time will tell. I feel for the teachers and administration dealing with these parents. Many of them are sharing their own "truth" and it's scarey.
DeleteSome of the same people are driving the bookbanning craze. The solution seems so simple: prohibit your child from reading what you find objectionable, but let me and my child make our own decision.
DeleteI think we can be most deceived by things that we think could be true which is where the person beliefs come in. e.g. It probably is true that I overpaid on my taxes, the government always takes too much of my money, so I should click on this email link to get some of my money back. Most of us, at any given time, are not taken in by such tactics but any of us can be taken in at some time.
ReplyDeleteOf course, do your own research, but scrolling though posts on your phone while sitting in the bathroom isn't really research. For those of us outside of the formal research community I would recommend using mainstream sources with reputations for vigorously fact checking their sources and also for publishing corrections when they are shown to be wrong.
And good luck sorting the wheat from the chaff--it's not always easy.
No, it is not easy at all when certain forces have become very adept at making chaff appear to be wheat.
DeleteI think one of the key reasons people confuse truth and wishful thinking is because of confirmation bias. (Everybody has it.) This means that if facts support our beliefs, we accept the facts. If the facts don't support our beliefs, we don't accept the facts, irrespective of the evidence. On top of that everyone is looking at life through multiple filters. In other words, we really don't see life as it is. We see life as we are, or as we have been conditioned to see it.
ReplyDeleteIn order to minimize such bias, questioning everything is critical. I remember an exercise in my college philosophy course over 50 years ago. In order to encourage students to question things, the professor told the students to buy liberal and conservative newspapers. He then told us to use an ink pen to cross out all assumptions, opinions, doctrines, hearsay, and especially jumping to conclusions on the front pages. After doing the exercise, I found that I, as well as the other students, had crossed out 90% of the front pages. The pages had only 10% factual information in award-winning newspapers. The most factual part of the newspapers were the sports sections. Similarly, when I listen to speakers, especially if the subject is religion or politics, I find that much of what they say is not evidence based.
I don't believe everything I think so I'm surely not going to believe everything someone else thinks. However, I try to keep things in balance. For example, If I believe everything, I wind up being too gullible. If I believe nothing, I'll land in cynicism. Consequently, I try to practice what I call "healthy skepticism", not too cynical or gullible. At any rate, questioning is my best defense against, spin, propaganda, and hidden agendas.
I think healthy skepticism is a phrase that decribes my attitude at present. And, I certainly have confirmation bias at times.
DeleteOne approach I have found educational is to look for the reasons behind someone's apparently misguided response. Often, it is based on fear, or simply a different way of looking at the same problem. I find my dismissive attitude softening a bit. I don't change my opinion but I have a better understanding of the rational of their choice.
Facts and opinions are rarely aligned with many people. Even if formed opinion is from fact, there might still be nonsense as to weird interpretation of what the fact tells us. There's no explaining to some.
ReplyDeleteArguing different interpretations of "truth" is rarely productive. What I believe is what I believe, until it isn't.
DeleteYour advice to "question everything" is sound. The problem we now face is that asking questions or seeking clarification is considered by some to be an act of hostility, a sin against "the tribal doctrine," and you risk being expelled. Every time I hear a friend or family member state "a fact," I immediately ask them to identify their source... in a nice way. I will say, "that's interesting. Where did you hear that?" More often than not they cannot recall or will say, "from a friend," or "the internet"... no specific sources.
ReplyDeleteMy training in science has given me relief from the need to "believe" in anything. I have varying degrees of confidence in all theories; like gravity (high confidence) vs. "space lasers starting forrest fires" (very low confidence), but everything is theoretically subject to falsification if new evidence comes to light. Doubt is the most valuable tool I have. The problem today is that increasingly people base their beliefs on emotions, values or what they would "like" to be true and it is beyond questioning. I refuse to engage in conversation with such people anymore as it is usually pointless. If by knowing your position on one issue I can predict your position on every other issue... you are not a serious person and I don't have time for you.
My favorite tee-shirt that I wear when I am out and about has provoked smiles, compliments and hostility. It says, "Science Does Not Care What You Believe."
Rick in Oregon
On a regular basis I remind myself that many of my beliefs and "firm" convictions in various situations have changed over the years. It is those who are rock-solid about something with no intention of reexaming what they believe who are the most unnerving to me.
DeleteWhoever said "an unexamined life isn't worth living" .had it right ( as does your T-shirt).
So, er ... true. I'm reminded of the old Paul Simon line from The Boxer: "A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."
ReplyDeletePerfect line from that song.
DeleteWhat you're describing here, Bob, highlights exactly why we need to make sure we get our news from credible sources - and not just one sided credible sources. That's the glory of local news and local newspapers, really, because they present a more balanced view than what you might get online, often looking only at the websites you agree with.
ReplyDeleteSo much of our news nowadays is spun to whatever the source thinks you want to hear that I just don't trust much of it. I much prefer to make up my own mind, thankyouverymuch. lol
I have very close family and friends that don't share my political views. I don't try to engage them in debates, I just listen to them spout whatever it is they believe and ask questions in a manner that shows I'm willing to listen to what they think - I like to think of it as being curious.
I believe everyone has the right to believe what they want. Needless to say, I'm often surprised at the conclusions people come to. I don't want to be an ostrich with my head in the sand, nor am I willing to accept something just because it's being said long and loud. I think most people (on either side) have good intentions, but when someone shows me they don't, I BELIEVE THEM.
I agree that local news sources tend to be more balanced. Unfortunately, local newspapers that are still in business, and even a lot of news on the radio, comes from national sources. It is simply not economically feasible to have local reporters.
DeleteOne national source i do feel confident has balanced reporting is NPR radio. In addition to national and international news, the Phoenix NPR station does present both local news and talk shows. Do they cover some of the more far-fetched conspiracies as potentially true? No. But, they do not seem to go out of their way to discredit or mock such ideas. I think they trust their listeners to figure it out.
Il like the concept of being curious about ideas that are different from yours. Curiosity causes us to consider what we believe to be true rather than just blindly rejecting someone else's beliefs, unless they fit the definition of not having good intentions.
One of my grown sons decided not to get the covid vaccine because, "You don't know what they're putting in your body." I reminded him that until he was 18 he had every vaccine available, and that he has been healthy most of his life. He had covid twice - quite sick both times. But now that he's going on a trip to Thailand next month with his brother, he's reconsidering. Go figure! Mostly I listen to people when they have opinions different from mine. I try to find common ground in at least one statement they make, and that usually ends the conversation without hostility.
ReplyDeleteYour son is a good example of the reality that humans reach conclusions on their own timetable and with their own filters.. Logic and reality are not always winners over emotions and fear. But, I certainly hope he has learned the dangers of the disease and protects both himself and his brother during their trip.
DeleteYour statement that truth does not change over time reminds me of a statement repeated throughout The Way of Mastery, referring to the Truth which is true always. I've been curious in recent years about the term "my truth" or "your truth." As if truth can be possessed, and can be different for different people. I think it better to say my experience, or my opinion, or my belief, rather than my truth. Good post!
ReplyDeleteIn the context of this discussion, truth is what is true as perceived by each of us. It is not necessarily directly connected to reality. As you say, taking ownership of a truth does not make it so.
DeleteIn answering this question I usually apply The duck test – "If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck"
ReplyDeleteYour post brings to mind the recent trial of Alex Jones, the one who claimed Sandy Hook never happened. There were a lot of people that bought into his "truth" who later heard the man, under oath, say he new it happened after all. These people who intentionally change the truth are terrible for society. This subject also reminds me of the movie "Don't Look Up" involving scientist trying to tell the world a deadly comet was going to hit the earth. People were protesting in the street against it and frustrating the scientist. It is a funny movie and such a good example of what is going on in our current, social media crazed world.
ReplyDeleteHow do you explain several candidates for next month's election who have completely flip-flopped on the issue of abortions but have not lost the support of their base?
DeleteTruth and integrity are flexible concepts. Power is the ultimate measure of truth.
I'm a big fan of NPR also. I think it's very telling that those who spout crazy "facts" suddenly become silent when asked to testify under oath in a court of law.
ReplyDeleteLike Alex Jones jumping on a jet today rather than testifying any more at the Sandy Hook trial penalty phase.
Delete