The Trouble With Truth

After hearing a gun shot, a young lady ran into a neighbor’s home. As she stood in the doorway of the strange home, she saw a man in the doorway across the room. He was about five foot seven inches tall and was putting a large gun away into his belt with his left hand. After putting the gun away he took a comb out of his left rear pocket and combed his hair with his left hand. After raking through his medium to short hair with the comb, he put the comb back into his left rear pocket with his left hand. The young lady could not see the man’s face but from the color of his arm he must have been middle eastern; he was very dark, but not of African decent. The young lady turned and ran to her home across the street and called the police. While waiting for the police, she peered out her window at the neighbor’s home. In about three minutes a woman left by the front door of her neighbor’s home. This woman was very tall with a long sleeve blouse on and she had slacks and shoulder length, black hair, and a dark complexion like the man the young lady had seen earlier. The dark woman ran down the street and around the corner and disappeared.

When the police came the young lady ran across the street to tell them what had happened. After giving the police a full description of the two people she had seen at her neighbor’s home, she went back to her home completely confident that she had gotten all her facts straight. Then she sat back to await the full details on the evening news. She was well satisfied by the news because all the details that she had given the police were on and they had even used her name.

As time went on, the young lady was called in from time to time to identify possible suspects. There were several of the suspects that sort of fit the description, but none that were right. After several months the police stopped calling her to come in. The police had run out of suspects.

The problem was that the young lady from across the street had seen the same criminal she had seen that day, in several line-ups. She had not recognized the perpetrator in the lineup because the truth of the crime was only the perceived truth. The truth was she had seen it was not the actual truth. The criminal was a right-handed Anglo-Saxon, more than six feet tall, and there was no woman involved in the crime, at all.

How could she be so mistaken about the crime? It was easy; when she entered the unfamiliar house, she did not know that she was looking into a mirror in a doorway across the room. That which she saw as left, was really right; so the left-handed man was really right-handed. Also, the mirror was tilted slightly upward so that the man appeared to be shorter than he really was. His middle eastern complexion came from working for several months in the sun. The tall woman leaving the house was really the very same man, who had put on a bra and blouse and covered his head with the victim’s wig. Because the young lady would not relent in her very accurate description, the criminal went unpunished. She was very sure that she had noted everything and that she was correct, and she WAS correct. She was highly accurate in the truth as she perceived it.

That is the problem with perceived truth. We know it is correct because we believe it to be correct, and we believe it to be correct because we have been convinced by something or someone. Now comes the problem: not all perceived truths are something other than the truth; some perceived truths are really true. But, all perceived truths should be questioned and researched and put to the test of REASON. This is not an unsupported idea: there are many professions based on this idea: the police detective, all scientists, or for instance, your minister. Some are in the quest for the hard facts, others are there to raise questions and let you supply your own answers, or the answers are supplied for you. Plato said, “Let us affirm what seems to be the truth, that whether one is or is not, one and the others in relation to themselves and one another, all of them, in every way, are and are not, and appear to be and appear not to be.”

For each of us the hard part is in questioning our own perceived truths, some of which we hold dear, or perceived truths we learned from our parents. It is very tough work questioning our parents’ teachings or our own beliefs in the search for actual truth. It is even harder work when the answer we seek might come out to our own detriment. Thomas Hobbes said, “such truth as opposeth no man’s profit nor pleasure is to all men welcome.” But, each of us must determine that which we are seeking: our own self esteem, vanity, ego, pleasure, profit, or truth no matter where it leads and no matter its outcome.

Now, one must consider if one really wants to know the truth. Consider the possibilities, then don’t ask the question if you can’t handle the truth. George Berkeley said, “Truth is the cry of all, but the game of few.” So, one must consider what stake another has in the answer to be given, one way or the other. This could shade the truth as given by another. By this I mean some truths are in delicate balance, or can be understood ambiguously. For instance, consider a letter of recommendation that says, “I would consider any company lucky that getd John Doe to work for them.” What does the writer mean by this sentence? Is it an accident or is the ambiguity on purpose? What is the truth?

One must also be careful in going the other way, in throwing out the true with the false. Democritus said, “All that exists are atoms and empty space. All else is just opinion.” This is a nice thought but it throws out a lot of actual truths in the process. Does one want to get this basic in their seeking of the truth? Most people don’t.

With hard evidence the truth is much easier to come upon; with thought and philosophies, truth might be illusive or even nonexistent. Hence, we have many divergent thoughts, philosophies, and religions. One must seek truth in their own thought, philosophy, and religion and render it down to the point that they can live comfortably with it, and to the point that works for them. But, one must always keep in mind that truth is alive and moving, and will change from time to time. That which was true yesterday, may or may not be true today, or tomorrow. New evidence and reasoning expand with our mental capacity, and that is expanded within each of us, through mental exercise. One must never stop questioning and exploring their own thoughts and ideas. This acts like a filter, and one might be surprised at what gets caught in the filter; it’s usually a lot of garbage that you want to throw out anyway. But make sure that the truth is not caught, and thrown away, if your sieve is too fine.

In thought, philosophy, and religion, one must ask oneself if there is such a thing as truth or is it just a point of view? It is said, “Everything is relative,” and that can certainly be applied to perceived truth. But Charles Sanders Peirce said, “Every man is fully satisfied that there is such a thing as truth or he would not ask any questions.” On the other hand, sometimes the questions are as important, if not more important, as the answers. In an apparent change of heart, the very same Peirce said, “It is the man of science, eager to have his every opinion regenerated, his every idea rationalized, by drinking at the fountain of fact and devoting all the energies of his life to the cult of truth, not as he understands it, but as he does not yet understand it, that ought properly to be called a philosopher.” So there is something to be said for the process. A great many prize the process of arriving at the truth, more highly than the truth. They realize that the truth could change, but the process will always stay the same, or at least stay very stable. One must not confuse the process of seeking, with dogma. Sometimes dogma is disguised as the process of seeking the truth. One will search and search, then have someone else tell him in what to believe.

The next truth to look at is functional truth. Functional truth is a suborder of perceived truth. If an innocent person is found guilty and that finding is never overturned, society goes on unaffected by this finding. Things go on seemingly unchanged by this new truth. The functional truth is that he is guilty.

It was once believed that the world was flat, that the Sun revolved around the Earth, that the Earth was the center of the Universe, and accepting these functional truths, little was changed. Today many believe that there is no life other than on Earth. I am sure that someday this will be looked upon as our functional truth, but also perceived process, functional truth and actual truth. People are like electricity; they will follow the line of least resistance. After a long, tiresome search, one will take another’s thoughts and ideas for one’s own. Having followed the process up to the point of discovery, one will then abandon it for lack of persistence, and the availability of easy answers. One must remember, there are no easy answers, and if you love the process, there are no easy questions. Questions are easy only if one knows the answers and tailors the questions to fit. One must abandon the easy answer, and easy questions, and let the process do its job. Always remember, don’t ask the question if you are not prepared to handle the answers. AND THAT IS THE TROUBLE WITH THE TRUTH!