Finding the truth

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 22/06/2024 (688 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

The dictionary definition of truth is “a fact or belief that is accepted as true”. But what of those who state that their “truth” is “the truth.” Neither of these assertions meet the dictionary definition of truth.

This unassailable belief, however, in what represents the truth has created serious problems. Often “the truth” is nothing more than an opinion.

The idea of “the truth” vs something merely being an opinion gets reinforced among those who function in rigid social/ethnic/religious circles where contrary opinions are considered heresy.

These truths are a product of groupthink. Groupthink is a powerful force in transforming opinion into truth.

And once people think they are operating based on a truth, they are less likely to pay attention to someone else’s opinion or to compromise.

Furthermore, as humans with a competitive nature the belief in an inviolable truth creates a dislike of those with a different perspective. Disagreements can quickly degenerate into personal animosity towards those who reject “the truth.”

Christopher Hitchens said, “that which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.” The problem is that people who believe in “the truth” are not open to other truths even when they are presented to them with compelling evidence.

All of this is counterproductive to reaching an understanding, agreement or resolution. Truth isn’t established by religious leaders or texts any more than it is established by political leaders.

It involves consensus. A truth is built on facts. And facts require proof/evidence.

Daniel Moynahan said that “you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts.” Indeed, you can have an opinion, but you are not entitled to present that opinion as a fact and impose it on everyone else.

Unfortunately, we are, increasingly, seeing how difficult it is to reach a common understanding as to the essential elements involved in a factual debate.

It has been documented, for example, that measles and polio are making a comeback because fewer parents are getting their children vaccinated. These problems are a direct result of our inability to resolve this vaccine controversy.

Medical truth requires the application of the scientific method, double blind experiments and independent verification of results. These truths involve an iterative process where theories are adjusted and fine tuned to accommodate new findings. Yesterday’s scientific truth evolves considering new facts.

Anecdotal evidence, therefore, is not scientific evidence. Regrettably, it is anecdotal evidence which is being used to fuel anti-science and anti-vaccine opinions.

As well correlation is being confused with causation. If a person falls ill after receiving a vaccination, it doesn’t mean that the vaccination caused the illness.

The truth/opinion debate represents a significant societal challenge. Under the heading of the right to free speech, we have granted considerable legitimacy to people who express opinions as truths. Everyone has an agenda, but that does not mean that all agendas are equal and deserving of broad dissemination.

Sadly, as a society, we have constructed an offender/victim dynamic rather than a process to discuss and resolve important issues. Pejorative terms like being woke, politically correct and far right or left are used as labels to disparage people.

The antidote to victimization is creation. Why haven’t we created the structures, mechanisms and critical thinking skills to help us distinguish between truth and opinion? What happened to our ability to take responsibility for our behaviour with a view to using communication skills to resolve our differences?

Winning and being right have become our raison d’etre. Who is right has trumped what is right.

It is not a case of having the courage of one’s convictions. We need openness to new possibilities and truths.

As Friedrich Nietzsche said, “it is a matter of having the courage for an attack on one’s convictions!”

Robert Pruden is a human relations practitioner, and Mac Horsburgh is a former critical incident stress debriefer.