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.

Learning and Intelligence

Learning and Intelligence:

I have a saying on my wall at work.  It says, “Knowledge tears the world apart.  Wisdom makes it whole.”  That is from an African tribal proverb.  I expanded upon that and continued, “Intelligence is the ability to use knowledge to gain wisdom.  True learning is the practice of intelligence.”  That was written many years ago.  Today my understanding has developed some.  I would amend it to say that true learning is acquiring the intelligence to incorporate knowledge into wisdom and to then disseminate wisdom into positive technologies.  Technology in this sense isn’t limited to electronics or even machines, but to the practice of making a useful and productive difference with the development and use of available physical, mental, systemic, and influential resources.

Knowledge that doesn’t lead to wisdom is nothing more than empty facts and concepts.  While the regurgitation of such might seem impressive, it doesn’t make a positive difference unless you are taking a scholastic test.  Wisdom takes the disparate facts and concepts and combines and develops them into the understanding which can lead to a positive difference.  Even then, until that wisdom or understanding is translated into objects, behaviors, and attitudes (technology) that really do result in positive developments, the wisdom is empty.  The true value of the guru on the mount isn’t in what he or she says, but in what difference their “wisdom” makes once the supplicant comes down off the mountain and makes day to day changes to thoughts and behaviors.

It can be understood, then, that true intelligence isn’t measured in the knowledge a person can recall and express.  It is only partially exhibited in the wisdom and deeper understanding  they develop from the knowledge they have acquired.  Ultimately, it is demonstrated in the positive difference that is made from the dissemination and application of that wisdom to themselves, others, and the world around them.

Our education system seems weighted towards rewarding those who can acquire and demonstrate knowledge.  It should, in addition, expand recognition to those who are able to transform that knowledge into measurable wisdom.  The highest reward would then be reserved for those who demonstrate the application of their wisdom into technologies that serve the world around them.

How might that work?  Here are some simplified examples applied across some different disciplines:

Math, Physics, and Chemistry:  Like many, I was not a big fan of story problems.  That said, learning how to manipulate formulas correctly without tying those formulas to application examples would seem to strike at the heart of what I’m concerned about.  All of our learning should be focused on how to apply what we learn--if not to something the student will occasionally face, at least to something concrete enough that they can see why there is value in learning the formulas.  I hated high level math and chemistry because all it seemed to be were rules and methods for moving numbers and symbols around on a page.  Physics was a little better, but often deteriorated to merely a different form of math.  Problem solving should be the focus of our STEM education, rather than problem solving be a method to get the right equation and answer on a test.

English and literature:  The best English teacher I had threw out the sentence diagrams and endless grammar and taught us what and how our words communicated.  If you want to say this, then here is how you approach it.  If you want to communicate this, then here are the basic rules and reason that governs your communication.  She even told us we could break some rules if we did it on purpose and if it accomplished the purpose of what we were trying to communicate.  Literature is too often presented as classical stories that students are forced to read and then regurgitate facts about the plot and characters.  The next level would be to try and foster an understanding of what the writer wanted to communicate in the story, how the characters’ actions and motives lead to the consequences seen, and what we learned from the story that might change how we approach our own challenges and joys in life.  Taken from that perspective, even younger children could get much more out of literature and, I might add, more quickly learn to distinguish between really good writing and simple fluff.

Some who agree with me otherwise may object to my thesis because it doesn’t address the valuable knowledge and experience that wouldn’t seem to directly lead to technology.  What about music, literature, classical studies and other so-called liberal arts?  This is a valid criticism.  I would like to learn Latin, be able to discourse on classical philosophies and comparative religions.  I want to be exposed to great painting, sculptures, fine music, and other ennobling and uplifting experiences.  There is more to life than STEM knowledge.  I would only say that I think these are also useful and do lead to valid technologies by sharpening and increasing the value of our primary tool, our intellect.  These classical disciplines help shape our creativity and expand our perspectives, thus increasing our capacity to achieve greater intelligence and more effectiveness in all other pursuits.  So, don’t get me wrong, I am all for any person’s exposure to more classical pursuits.  I think it is a shame that our school systems seem to be moving away from these things to a focus on solely STEM stuff and sports.

In summary, I think we do a disservice to our society and our developing youth by too narrowly measuring what we deem as academic success.  While acquiring knowledge and skills is important, I think it pales in comparison with an education that teaches the upcoming generation how to reason, problems solve, and constantly be learning in order to adapt to an ever more quickly changing world.  To do this, we have to get beyond facts and concepts to concentrate more on developing the wisdom and intelligence that will be necessary to take our species successfully on into the future.

What I Don't Know

Things I Don’t Know:

1)    I Don’t Know Why People Do the Things They Do.  I can observe people’s actions and behaviors, but I can only guess at why they act the way they do.  I make a grave error when I assume somebody’s motives and reasons based on how their behavior affects me or others around them.  I may assume malice or affection when they haven’t felt either.  Even if they tell me their reasons, I may only get half the story as people are complicated and may have multiple, even conflicting, reasons behind their choices.  The lesson?  It is a dangerous self deception to categorize or stereotype others based solely on their observed behavior or choices.   Deal with the behavior and actions without assuming the motives.  I should explain the consequences of others’ actions and negotiate a change in behavior rather than try and change what I might think are the other person’s ideas or assumptions.

2)    I Can’t Speak for God.  Whether you believe in God, providential fate, or just the random chance of life, I don’t know the mind of the universe.  I can’t define for you the ultimate truth.  I can’t tell you who God loves or hates (although I hope he doesn’t hate) or why he allows or causes certain things.  I can tell you what I believe based on my own experience and thoughts, but I can’t extend that out to apply to all humanity as the one and ultimate truth.  Nor do I feel comfortable in telling most that their beliefs are deluded, evil, or just wrong.  I can only say what I believe and how I might feel different from them and allow them to accept or reject it as they choose.  The lesson is that I’m slow to accept the ultimate truth as presented by others without first gaining a testimony of those truths through my own experience and rumination.  Even then, I can only adopt it as what I now believe and not assume everybody will or should believe the same.

3)    I Don’t Know History:  I consider myself an amateur historian, but I also recognize that most of what I’ve learned about history is from what somebody else wrote, and often that was written based on what still others may have presented earlier--resulting in opinions and perceptions based on opinions and perceptions.  History is written by historians and few, if any of them present an unbiased view.  And, the farther we go back in time, the fewer are the verifiable facts from which to draw assumptions.  Hence, we are left to try and draw conclusions from incomplete information often handed down from biased sources.  The lesson?  Take all historical “facts” with a large grain of salt.  It’s always a valid question to ask, “how do we really know that?”  And on a related note. . .

4)    I Don’t Know Reality:  My limited understanding of quantum physics is that scientists have shown that the very act of observing a thing, changes the thing.  Further, objects and situations can appear vastly different depending on the focus and perception of the viewer.  Hence, it seems that our limited mortal viewpoint makes it impossible to have a conclusive perception of reality.  Rather, all I have is my perception of reality as I see it--which is likely skewed and incomplete at best.  I have told others that I don’t think anybody has a right to an opinion until they can understand and argue the facts from at least three different and opposing perceptions.  Even then, I realize a true reality may be vastly different still.  The lesson is to recognize and accept that how we see our reality is a child of our perception and not our perceptions being the children of any fully discernible reality.

5)    I Don’t Know that I’m Right:  I can know my opinion and preferences.  I can know what I think is best, at least for me.  I can express and explain my perception.  But, I can never know with complete certainty that I’m right.  Why?  To be absolutely sure that I’m right, I would need to meet a few impossible criteria.  One, I would need to have a complete understanding of the situation from all the different perspectives.  I would need to understand the thoughts, motivations, and intentions of all the other people involved.  I would need to feel comfortable that my own intentions and perceptions were all motivated by the greater good for all involved, including individuals, other life forms affected, and the environment.  If you can find somebody who is able to say they meet all those criteria, then they can say they are right--but they are also deluded.  Lesson?  Humility and a willingness to always entertain the possibility of more information and a better understanding--leading to the possibility you may NOT be totally right.
6)  I Don’t Know Jack:  Bottom line is that I don’t know Jack.  Like all of you I am muddling my way through life based on too little information and not enough understanding.  I’m just trying to do the best I can with what I got--and often I mess up.  My only hope is that if I’m trying to do little harm and occasionally some good, that whatever fate comes next in the eternities it will take that into account and not dump me in some proverbial lake of fire and brimstone.  Good luck out there in your own journey towards knowing what you don’t know.