TRUTH OR CONSEQUENCES

Back in the day there used to be a game show on TV called Truth or Consequences. 
Contestants had to try and discern what was truth and would then be subjected to
the consequences of their choices.  Needless to say, the situations they
confronted were not straight forward and discerning the truth was seldom
easy--resulting in a lot of negative consequences.  Real life is often like that
and stresses our ability to know what is true and right in the situations we face
and the information we are bombarded with.

In our increasingly partisan political sphere, both ends of the spectrum decry
the false news and alternate facts presented by the other side, leaving the
non-partisan observer to wonder what the real truth could be.  While ostensibly
we have a justice system that says we are innocent until proven guilty, too often
an allegation is treated as a conviction and lives ruined before the truth is
fully discovered.  In the meantime, our judgement on the truth is often
influenced much more by the prejudices and preconceptions we have than by any
demonstrated application of the undisputed facts.  Advertisers pummel us with
buzz words and claims that aren’t proven or backed up by factual information,
then hide behind an excuse that they were qualitative and not quantitative
statements and therefore not subject to validation by any consistent and
accepted standard.  So, we are left to form emotionally charged opinions and
take irreparable actions based on incomplete and biased information--the
all-to-often unfortunate consequences of the lack of truth.

Truth is not always comfortable or comforting.  It can challenge long accepted
myths and make human our heros.  Truth can have many sides and multiple
perspectives and some may want to hide from alternate viewpoints that could
challenge their partial understandings.  Real truth isn’t afraid of challenges
to what is commonly accepted or currently in vogue.  It recognizes that some
truths are only true in certain times and circumstances and that as those
circumstances change, the truth evolves and encompasses what is now and not only
what was.  And, frustrating as it is, some truths are as yet fully unknowable
and we have to admit that we really don’t have a complete understanding and be
comfortable with the resultant ambiguity and unanswered questions.

What can we do, then, to arrive at closer approximations of the truth and reap the
appropriate consequences?  I would suggest a couple things and present a list that
is admittedly simplified and incomplete, but hopefully still helpful.

First, accept that seldom is one perspective complete and that the full truth is
not often obtainable from one perspective.  It has been said that there is my truth,
your truth, the truth of others, and the real truth that would incompass it all. 
In all but the simplest circumstances, you can only begin to approximate the truth
by seeing things from multiple perspectives.  If you are unwilling to challenge
and expand your views to take in all those other perspectives, then the real truth
will alway illude you.  Getting to the truth takes effort, study, and an accepting
attitude to views that may seem foreign to you at first.  Even then, we need to
find peace with a certain amount of the ambiguous and unknown and accept that
we are acting, to some degree, on incomplete knowledge and limited
understanding.  But, unless you can argue a point from multiple sides, you
don’t have the right to a respected opinion.

Second, recognize that strong emotion and conviction does not define or validate
the truth.  That isn’t to say that we have to put aside emotion to find truth,
but it is a strong admonition to not let emotion dictate what we see as truth and
right.  In our society, being passionate often carries more weight than being
right.  An angry person is seen as having the truth on their side because of the
weight of their passion.  Tears, whatever they may convey, are seen as a sign that
the soul is sincere, if not justified.  Of course, neither perception is right. 
In reality, anger is very often a defensive gesture when we are less than sure in
our deepest understanding of our correctness.  And tears convey an emotion, not a
truth.  While we will, and often should, feel emotion, we can’t use it as a ruler
to measure truth.

Third, facts and statistics are not in and of themselves the truth.  I had a
statistics class in college where we were told by the instructor that there are
lies, damn lies, and then there are statistics.  The humorous lesson was that a
statistic, in and of itself, seldom proves anything without knowing exactly what
was measured, how it was measured, and what assumptions were used to design the
measurement and interpret the results.  A “scientific” study isn’t a complete
conclusion on a treatise.  Unless we back up and discover the answers to lots of
highly relevant questions first, we should always question the statistical
facts.  For instance, a study suggests that a certain food is bad for you.  That
may be true, but before you begin posting it on Facebook and changing your diet,
you should ask some things.  Was the study double blinded, meaning both those
conducting the study and those participating were not in a position to influence
the results by, for instance, knowing who the control groups were?  Were the
researchers truly independent or were they rewarded by coming up with one
result over another?  They may be influenced by the money from whomever
commissioned the study, or by an attempt to support their own pet theories. 
In addition, all studies presuppose certain assumptions.  If those assumptions
are flawed, then so will the results be.  Were all the contributing variables
controlled for?  If not, then vastly incorrect assumptions may be made about
what caused an effect.  Finally, have the results been consistently duplicated
by other studies from different researchers?  If not, we can at best make
some preliminary claims.  As you can see, it gets technical and requires
additional study and effort on our part.  Then again, if we aren’t willing
to dig into the facts and statistics, we may be mislead and jump to the
wrong conclusion.

In conclusion, we can ask as did the biblical Pilate, “what is truth?”  We can
be assured that much of what we are subjected to each day is at best a partial
truth and at worst a fabrication.  It is only through letting go of our biases
and emotional opinions and opening ourselves up to multiple perspectives that
we can begin to approximate the truth.  And finally it takes effort to validate
the facts and check the statistics if we are to come to a more confident
conclusion about what is truth in a particular situation and to a particular
question.  Not willing to practice such humility and do the work?  Well, then,
back to your emotionally charged and limited viewpoints.  Express your opinions
with great passion, quote whatever statistic or study supports you regardless
of its validity, refuse to entertain any contrary views or facts, and label
all challenging information or viewpoints as incorrect and biased.  I’m sure
you are right, after all, and anybody who disagrees with you must just be stupid
or immoral.