jcsbimp01: my user icon taken in 2014 (Default)
We need philosophers.

Because sometimes when being right carries great amounts of importance, and people start claiming that they've got the truth, or that others are awful liars, it's good to know what truth is. Not what *the* truth is: what truth itself is.

And language is such a finicky and fiddly commodity, as it changes over the years, that we need to take that set of symbols and meanings - the ones we use to construct thoughts and ideas about our lives - and work out what truth is all over again. Maybe we can do it with a nice new translation of Plato. Maybe Heidegger and Kant and even *shudder* Derrida will be more helpful.

But philosophy is best engaged with one's own thought process. So let's do some thinking about what truth is.

When we look out into the world with our senses, we are bringing in to our brains the products of the phenomenon of observation. It's a phenomenon of observation, but it's also the observation of phenomena. Let's call that our phenomenological world. It's the world our senses bring to us. Can you think of anything else that is real to you? Even your thoughts are a phenomenology created by your brain activity, responding to your other senses and sensations.

Now, because we have this wonderful invention called "language," we can construct sets of symbols to say stuff about the world we inhabit. We can say it to other living beings of whom we've become phenomenologically aware: our Mom, first, then our Dad, other people over time since our birth. We have strong evidence from our senses that these people exist: The sensations that come from them persist.

And there is so much else about which to construct thoughts to share with these other beings! And we want to describe those thoughts about that sharing accurately.

Accuracy is the key to what we call "truth": When we represent the world accurately in language, we are making statements that are true to the world: They align with its features. Similarities and differences are ways we can talk about that truth. If I deduce something will happen, based on observation, the similarity or difference of what actually happens with what I predicted tells me whether my deduction was accurate. The extent to which they are similar is the extent of truth of my understanding of how the world - the part of the world I'm observing - works.

Fidelity of our words and perceptions and ideas to what is actually out there, to the extent that it comes back *in* *here* to our brains through our senses, is how we arrive at what we call truth. Fidelity/Truth: We talk about this in other contexts: Your faithfulness to your partner is how true you are to them, or that at least is the language we use.

So when people say we're in a post-truth society, and when other people throw around on news and social media so much commentary and speculation and noise and manipulation ... keep in mind that there is that which matches up quite nicely with - that is, it is TRUE to - the world which we can observe. And there is that which differs from it. And there is a whole industry, or set of industries, making themselves rich by calling something true, getting us to buy into it, and then cashing in on the difference between what they've sold us, and what is really true.

We need to get back to basics, be better and smarter at figuring out truth, and shame those who would profit from selling us something else.

Unless of course they're clever writers of fiction for fiction's sake. Those guys are GOLDEN.
jcsbimp01: my user icon taken in 2014 (Default)
Those who take the Bible as being, among other descriptors, a book of literally true history encounter a rude awakening when confronted with actual evidence from what we know about human history.

Faced with this, if we dig in, plant our feet, and say that it's scholarship, knowledge, or the academic/scientific/research world which is in erorr, well, we're missing any constructive point about what truth in religious tradition is supposed to be.

It's not about the literal and historical fidelity of people long ago without science and history developed like it is today, without even a sense of there being categories we now call "fiction" and "non-fiction" in the stories they said were important and "true."

I'm going to have to go back to something I read several years ago by a Theosophist, Annie Besant. I don't claim Theosophy as an ideology to which I adhere. But I did see something she wrote that really resonated with me. She wrote it over a half-century before I was born. She said there were several different types of Truth, the historical/scientific/literal truth being in some way the shallowest one, the most facile and least meaningful way to understand something, especially something written. Metaphorical, symbolic, hidden, and spiritual truths exist, and most strongly in religious discussion, or even in religious texts. Getting hung up over whether "it really happened" is getting hung up over a lot of barriers distracting and distancing us from actual deeper truths to which these old, pre-scientific-method, pre-historic-scholarship texts attest.

As the literalists seem to also suffer from a lot of cognitive dissonance - witness in particular the supporters of Tangerine Godzilla in the White House - perhaps we should take a warning from their example and not get so caught up in literalism that we drown our brains in the bathwater with the baby. Whether or not he was really, truly, actually born in Bethlehem.

There's still a lot of truth in the Bible - truth is to be found in abundance, in fact, in many or all sacred texts. We just need to be less like mindless sheep, grazing without an eye for anything but the obvious. And yes, we can still choose which religious teachings have the greatest ring of truth to our ears and hearts, even sharing what we've learned and what has blessed us with others. But recognize that the literalistic path has so often, and not only in the Christian faiths, been used by those in power to manipulate, enslave, exile, or kill others. When you wield "truth" that way, it comes across as the blunt instrument you've made it. And you hurt yourself as much as you hurt others with it.

Profile

jcsbimp01: my user icon taken in 2014 (Default)
jcsbimp01

April 2022

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
1011121314 1516
17181920212223
24252627282930

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Aug. 21st, 2025 05:22 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios