When he said other nations were either with him or against him, Bush wasn’t stating a fact; he was creating one | Reuters
Does truth have a history, itself has been history, or has become a thing of history in a world that increasingly tends to look at truths as alternative facts? It is a common perception that truth is an integral value of human nature, or all living creatures’ instinct. Seen from a historical perspective, truth is considered a behavioural trait that humans have nurtured over time and that has been tested through civilisational and sociocultural processes. Religion is considered the prime custodian of the value of truth; it claims to purify and establish this value and develop an instinct to recognise falsehoods.
While civilisational processes have sped up, new perspectives to look at the truths and falsehoods of life — including that of ‘post-truth’ — are emerging. However, Julian Baggini, a historiographer of
philosophy, contests the idea in his new publication A Short History of Truth: Consolations for a Post-Truth World. He argues that though there is no species of truth that cannot be questioned, that does not mean that truth cannot be established either. He identifies 10 types of truths which are basically an overview of the philosophical debate on reason; he extracts the history of truths from these debates. The 10 kinds of truths he explores are: eternal, authoritative, esoteric, reasoned, evidence-based, creative, relative, powerful, moral and holistic.
A philosophical exploration of truth provides interesting insights
Baggini himself appears to be an advocate of moral truths and suggests restoring faith in the value and possibility of truth as a social enterprise. By asserting that truth-seekers need to be sceptical, not cynical, he indeed judges truth as an essential value of human civilisation that should not be eroded in this rapidly changing world. Though truth has become much less plain and simple, there is no evidence, Baggini claims, that most people have ceased to believe in it, and that the world is neither ready nor willing to say goodbye to truth.
Baggini explains that distinguishing truth from falsehood is not an easy task and emotions also factor in our going with our guts and hearts instead. Truths can be, and often are, difficult to understand, discover, explain and verify. Emotions not only hurt truths, but also create a situation in which one creates or conceives one’s own way of understanding truths — probably not deeming it a process of post-truth conditionalisation, but a paradoxical behaviour where a majority does not accept a majority opinion. “In other words, a majority believes in at least one revelation that the majority judges to be false. This is a salutary lesson for anyone who trusts the wisdom of crowds,” he elaborates.
One interesting category of truth-seekers, according to Baggini, is the absolute literalists, but even they see their faith as no more than metaphor and allegory. Most take a pick-and-mix attitude to literality, accepting some things as facts and others as just stories.
The fourth chapter, on reasoned truths, describes the process of reasoning and in the process own judgement becomes important, which may not be justified rationally. However, hidden or esoteric truths have their own domain. This is an old notion that there are few truths about whom only a few people know and this is the domain of faith, where not only religions, but science and suspicion also mingle with each other.
Baggini does not reject ‘conspiracy theories’, but considers them a way to find out the truth. He underscores that when experiments do not work, scientists usually do not completely abandon the hypothesis they are testing. Rather, they review their methods or assumptions to figure out what they got wrong, tweak the experiment and try again. Similarly, those analysing the effects of placing reason and truth at the centre of government should not give up yet. Perhaps we have been testing the wrong things. Baggini agrees with the view that pure reason may not arrive at some absolute truth; according to him, reason works best in a blend that includes not just logic, but experience, evidence, judgment, subtlety of thought and sensitivity to ambiguity. Reason is more like a navigation tool that can help us get closer to the truth.