Difference between revisions of "Truth"
(→Problem) |
(→Chomsky) |
||
| (25 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
==Context== | ==Context== | ||
| − | *Truth has been the subject of [[Epistemology]] and philosophers for thousands of years. | + | * Truth has been the subject of [[Epistemology]] and philosophers for thousands of years. |
| − | *The original Western Philosophical traditions | + | * The original Western Philosophical traditions starting with Thales looked for [[Truth]] from the natural philosophy of reality. |
| − | *By the time of Plato the search for truth had turned into the anthropomorphic search for human | + | * By the time of Plato, the search for truth had turned into the anthropomorphic search for human [[Knowledge]]. A very different subject. |
| + | * Christopher Hitchens' maxim: "What is asserted without a proof, can be dismissed without a proof." | ||
==Problem== | ==Problem== | ||
| Line 13: | Line 14: | ||
But what is truth? Is truth unchanging law? | But what is truth? Is truth unchanging law? | ||
We both have truths - are mine the same as yours? | We both have truths - are mine the same as yours? | ||
| + | *The challenges of human efforts at discovering truth are summarized on the page [[General_Theory_of_Living_Systems#Problems]]. | ||
| + | *Human [[Knowledge]] or understanding is a poor measure of truth values. | ||
| + | *There was a time when we would believe that photographs or videos were factual, but "now that everything can be faked, how will we know what's real?"<ref>Joshua Rothman, Afterimage (2018-11-12) New Yorker p. 34ff</ref> It seems that we are moving to a point of zero trust where people [[Apophenia|just believe what they have been conditioned to accept.]] | ||
| + | * Philosophers, like Chomsky, universally depend on the rational man in open debate. An ideal form that doesn't seem to exist in the real world of ideas. | ||
| + | ===Chomsky=== | ||
| + | An explanation drawn from Chomsky’s own writings shows that he maintains that truth must emerge from a process of active, informed scrutiny rather than being dictated by the uncritical aggregation of popular opinion (i.e., “mob rule”): | ||
| + | |||
| + | Critique of Manufactured Consent: In Manufacturing Consent (co-written with Edward Herman), Chomsky explains that mass media—and by extension, public discourse—are structured by powerful interests. According to Chomsky, the “consensus” that appears to be arising from the public is not the product of a free and open search for truth but rather the outcome of filtering information through elite-determined frameworks. This means that when people simply follow the dominant narrative without its critical examination, they aren’t uncovering truth so much as accepting a prepackaged version of reality engineered by those with power. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Role of the Intellectual and Informed Debate: Chomsky has repeatedly argued (for example, in his essay “The Responsibility of Intellectuals”) that intellectual honesty requires subjecting received wisdom to vigorous critical examination. He contends that truth is not simply what the majority says—because the majority is susceptible to misinformation, manipulation, and the influence of concentrated power—but what is uncovered by subjects who dare to question, debate, and investigate beyond the surface. In other words, genuine truth emerges when individuals are proactive in challenging established views, rather than simply deferring to them as “mob opinion.” This stance underscores the need for a robust and independent critical apparatus, both in academia and in public life, to sift through propaganda and reveal underlying realities. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Distinguishing Informed Consensus from Mob Rule: Chomsky’s perspective differentiates between a deliberative democracy based on informed debate and what he would see as the hazards of mob rule. He is wary of equating majoritarian sentiment with truth because popular opinion can be—and often is—shaped by institutional narratives, media control, and the interests of elites. For Chomsky, true understanding comes only when there is a persistent commitment to skepticism, rigorous debate, and the questioning of dominant narratives. This process of “active, informed scrutiny” is what he upholds as necessary for society to edge closer to the truth2. | ||
| + | |||
| + | In sum, the basis for the assertion is found throughout Chomsky’s work: he consistently argues that a genuine search for truth requires independent thought and critical analysis rather than unreflective acceptance of prevailing viewpoints. His critiques of the media and political power illustrate his belief that what appears to be consensus—if unchallenged—can simply be a manufactured reality that suppresses dissent and genuine inquiry. | ||
==Solution== | ==Solution== | ||
| − | # Go back to the original Greek philosophers and seek [[Information]] that is in concert with reality irrespective of any human endeavor. | + | # Go back to the original Greek philosophers and seek [[Information]] that is in concert with reality irrespective of any human endeavor. |
| + | # Focus on [[Information]] and not on human [[knowledge]]. | ||
| + | # For [[Identity Proofing]] the best source of [[Truth]] is reporting [[Information]] on an [[Audit]] of the processes that were used to build [[Assurance]]. | ||
| + | According to Xenophanes<ref>Xenophanes, translation by Karl Popper, ''The World of Parmenides'', B34. ISBN 978-0415518796</ref> | ||
| + | <pre> | ||
| + | But as for certain truth, no man has known it, | ||
| + | Nor will he know it; neither of the gods | ||
| + | Nor yet of all the things of which I speak. | ||
| + | And even if by chance he were to utter | ||
| + | The perfect truth, he would himself not know it; | ||
| + | For all is but a woven web of guesses | ||
| + | </pre> | ||
| + | Despite that gloomy outlook Philosophers have been seeing a '''Foundation''' on which to build a edifice of human knowledege.<ref>Keith Parsons, ''It started with Copernicus'' p309 ISBN 9781616149291</ref><ref>Alasdair McIntyre, ''After Virtue''</ref> | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==References== | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[Category:Glossary]] | ||
| + | [[Category:Philosophy]] | ||
Latest revision as of 13:21, 24 May 2025
Full Title or Meme
Context
- Truth has been the subject of Epistemology and philosophers for thousands of years.
- The original Western Philosophical traditions starting with Thales looked for Truth from the natural philosophy of reality.
- By the time of Plato, the search for truth had turned into the anthropomorphic search for human Knowledge. A very different subject.
- Christopher Hitchens' maxim: "What is asserted without a proof, can be dismissed without a proof."
Problem
- Tim Rice captured the heart of the problem in Jesus Christ Superstar:
[JESUS] I look for truth, and find that I get damned [PILATE] But what is truth? Is truth unchanging law? We both have truths - are mine the same as yours?
- The challenges of human efforts at discovering truth are summarized on the page General_Theory_of_Living_Systems#Problems.
- Human Knowledge or understanding is a poor measure of truth values.
- There was a time when we would believe that photographs or videos were factual, but "now that everything can be faked, how will we know what's real?"[1] It seems that we are moving to a point of zero trust where people just believe what they have been conditioned to accept.
- Philosophers, like Chomsky, universally depend on the rational man in open debate. An ideal form that doesn't seem to exist in the real world of ideas.
Chomsky
An explanation drawn from Chomsky’s own writings shows that he maintains that truth must emerge from a process of active, informed scrutiny rather than being dictated by the uncritical aggregation of popular opinion (i.e., “mob rule”):
Critique of Manufactured Consent: In Manufacturing Consent (co-written with Edward Herman), Chomsky explains that mass media—and by extension, public discourse—are structured by powerful interests. According to Chomsky, the “consensus” that appears to be arising from the public is not the product of a free and open search for truth but rather the outcome of filtering information through elite-determined frameworks. This means that when people simply follow the dominant narrative without its critical examination, they aren’t uncovering truth so much as accepting a prepackaged version of reality engineered by those with power.
Role of the Intellectual and Informed Debate: Chomsky has repeatedly argued (for example, in his essay “The Responsibility of Intellectuals”) that intellectual honesty requires subjecting received wisdom to vigorous critical examination. He contends that truth is not simply what the majority says—because the majority is susceptible to misinformation, manipulation, and the influence of concentrated power—but what is uncovered by subjects who dare to question, debate, and investigate beyond the surface. In other words, genuine truth emerges when individuals are proactive in challenging established views, rather than simply deferring to them as “mob opinion.” This stance underscores the need for a robust and independent critical apparatus, both in academia and in public life, to sift through propaganda and reveal underlying realities.
Distinguishing Informed Consensus from Mob Rule: Chomsky’s perspective differentiates between a deliberative democracy based on informed debate and what he would see as the hazards of mob rule. He is wary of equating majoritarian sentiment with truth because popular opinion can be—and often is—shaped by institutional narratives, media control, and the interests of elites. For Chomsky, true understanding comes only when there is a persistent commitment to skepticism, rigorous debate, and the questioning of dominant narratives. This process of “active, informed scrutiny” is what he upholds as necessary for society to edge closer to the truth2.
In sum, the basis for the assertion is found throughout Chomsky’s work: he consistently argues that a genuine search for truth requires independent thought and critical analysis rather than unreflective acceptance of prevailing viewpoints. His critiques of the media and political power illustrate his belief that what appears to be consensus—if unchallenged—can simply be a manufactured reality that suppresses dissent and genuine inquiry.
Solution
- Go back to the original Greek philosophers and seek Information that is in concert with reality irrespective of any human endeavor.
- Focus on Information and not on human knowledge.
- For Identity Proofing the best source of Truth is reporting Information on an Audit of the processes that were used to build Assurance.
According to Xenophanes[2]
But as for certain truth, no man has known it, Nor will he know it; neither of the gods Nor yet of all the things of which I speak. And even if by chance he were to utter The perfect truth, he would himself not know it; For all is but a woven web of guesses
Despite that gloomy outlook Philosophers have been seeing a Foundation on which to build a edifice of human knowledege.[3][4]
References
- ↑ Joshua Rothman, Afterimage (2018-11-12) New Yorker p. 34ff
- ↑ Xenophanes, translation by Karl Popper, The World of Parmenides, B34. ISBN 978-0415518796
- ↑ Keith Parsons, It started with Copernicus p309 ISBN 9781616149291
- ↑ Alasdair McIntyre, After Virtue
