Recently I’ve been mulling over the concept of “Truth,” and how it is viewed and taken in society. Perhaps this is due to some recent findings that have come to light in mainstream media (e.g. exoneration of JonBenet Ramsey’s parents), or perhaps due to some occurrences in my personal life. Whatever the cause of my contemplation, it is perfectly clear to me that our desire and (seemingly necessary) quest for instantaneous responses to everything has a profound effect on our willingness to accept the complexity of Truth.
Succinctly said, people seem more willing to believe something that is false as long as it is simple to grasp rather than to believe something that is complex no matter how true.
We live in an era of instant potatoes and instant messages. Instead of giving an in-depth take on a speech by a political candidate, many news outlets dumb-down the contents of the speech and release (often-misleading) 5 second sound-bytes. In our personal lives, if a text message is not responded to within 60 seconds we are often frustrated and sometimes angry at the person we sent the message to.
It used to be that a good journalist could shorten a candidate’s speech, and (contextually) relay its message without sucking out all of its necessary juices (content). Now it seems that many times all we are left with is the immediate image of the outer shell of the candidate’s intent, with no fruitful substance to partake of. And on a similar note, some text message questions/conversations can’t simply be responded to in 120 characters of a text response. Understanding an issue, and getting to the truth(s) behind it often takes far more time than we are willing to give it.
The complexity of Truth necessitates that many factors be understood, including factors like context and perspective; indeed it takes context and perspective to understand most things, and these things take time (i.e. one doesn’t just wake up with a perspective, it is developed over time…likewise, background information needs to be gathered to be given context). But instead of actually taking the time to understand the complexity of a given story, situation or issue, we too often take in the headline without delving into its background.
I won’t belabor the point, but I will just ask of anyone reading this, do more than just accept the subject line of an issue as the Truth. Ask the follow-up question (or questions, as the case may be). Consider the source, question the relevance, determine the potential ramifications. Compare these parameters with the realities you have faced. Finally, make a calculated assessment as to whether something is likely true or not.
Because in this day of instant “this” and instant “that,” it is way too easy to believe things that are false as a result of their simplicity, and equally as easy to count something that is true to be false due to its complexity.
Think about it!
-Maelstrom
3 comments:
I second that! I am going even further: there is no single truth. The word "truth" itself is just a term for people to argue about (Check Indiana Jones 3). It is the perfect thing, without flaws. It simplifies the world into black and white, and the world is not even gray-scaled. It is colorful and the "truth" depends on your definition of the object in question. Does Obama utilize 'dirty' tricks to get to his goals? Depends on what you consider dirty and on what you don't know about him. So is there a single truth?
Second point I thought about when reading your great blog: simplicity vs. complexity and people jumping for the simple, mostly false conclusion. There was this discussion at this T1 school in the area where scientist discussed with journalists about Conservatives spreading simple, but false conclusions. Then the scientists said, that is true BUT we cannot explain the true argument in simple ways because that would destroy science. "If people really want to learn about it, they have to study science like we did for 10 years. If those people don't care about the subject sufficiently and don't have the brains, we don't care about them." (They did not say that verbatim but implied it). Why can the person who has figured out the puzzle not sell his point in a short time frame? Does it mean that he himself still doubts? Can it be he is not a good public speaker?
Since I especially like the ending "Think about it" I ended my comments with ?.
Think?
Misconception is big business and problem solving skills are not prioritized in many American institutions. The right answer is stressed while the reason behind it neglected. The complexity of truth can therefore overburden those concerned only with an answer and yet disinterested in the truth.
By the way buddy...
When you are going through hell, keep going. -Winston Churchill
Whatever you are going through, I know you are stronger.
Tru. :-)
Post a Comment