WHAT IS TRUTH?

 I recently had an opportunity to spend some time with my now-grown son, transporting him to a destination a few hours away. In my naïveté, I thought that it would be enjoyable to engage in some thought-experiments to pass the time.

It is my custom to establish a “glossary-of-terms” prior to commencing such discussions. This is done in an effort to minimize confusion in the use of terms employed. Sounds like a good idea, right?

My first question was, “Do you believe ‘truth’ exists?” My son’s response reminded me of the “Calvin & Hobbes” comic-strip in which Calvin is convinced he is well prepared for an upcoming examination. However, Calvin is stymied by the first thing he sees at the top of the exam - “Name.” 

Calvin’s consternation becomes readily apparent, when he exclaims, “Name! Whose name?”

My son was immediately on the defensive. After indicating that he did agree with its existence, I asked him how he would define “truth.” He told me that he was certain that it would be easy to define, but provided no definition.

It does, at first blush, appear easy to define. Is it?

“Pilate said to Jesus, ‘So you are a king, are you?’ Jesus answered, ‘You say that I am a king. For this I was born, and for this I have come into the world, to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice.’ Pilate said to him, ‘What is truth?’” (John 18:37-38).

Is “truth” easily addressed by seeking solace in reality? Einstein stated, “Reality is an illusion.”

May we simply address the issue by stating, “I’ll know it when I see it?” In attempting to define pornography,  Justice Potter Stewart stated: “I have reached the conclusion . . . I know it when I see it.“ (Jacobellis v. Ohio 1964)

An enthymeme (Greek: ἐνθύμημα, enthýmēma) is a form of rational appeal, or deductive argument. It is also known as a rhetorical syllogism and is used in oratorical practice. While the syllogism is used in dialectic, or the art of logical discussion, the enthymeme is used in rhetoric, or the art of public speaking. Enthymemes are usually developed from premises that accord with the audience’s view of the world and what is taken to be common sense.

Unfortunately, if Kierkegaard’s assertion that truth is subjective is correct, it becomes readily apparent that the perception is likely to vary from subject to subject. If truth is not objective, can truth actually exist? If truth does not exist, can we “truly” (whatever that may mean) know anything?

I am reminded of a quote attributed to Mark Twain: “It ain’t what he don’t know that concerns me. It’s what he knows that ain’t so.”

Jesus said, “You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free. He also stated, “I am the way, the truth and the life.” In John 3:21, He informs us “[H]e who practices the truth comes to the light . . ..” He also said, “My Word is truth.”

That is sufficiently puzzling, but what if you reject Jesus’ teachings? Upon what, if any, standard are we to rely? Locke concluded that truth is that which responds to reality. Perhaps, we may best define truth as that which coheres to a referent. Does that really resolve the issue?

For those who proclaim truth is reality as perceived by God, it appears to discount the omniscience attributed to the Triune God. Is it naive to suggest that God perceives rather than knows?

Some religions simply state that God’s name is truth. Unfortunately, for those who either don’t believe in God or refuse to accept that statement as fact, what is “their” truth? Does “absolute” truth exist or must we accept the relative nature of truth? Is truth merely subjective or may we demonstrate that it is objective?

As we concluded our discussion, my son acknowledged that he was suspicious of the intent behind the inquiry as to whether he believed truth existed. This suspicion, per my son, was predicated upon his assumption that the inquiry arose from something obtained from Fox News. My son stated that Fox News lies.

I informed him that I neither watch nor listen to Fox News. It is naive, however, to conclude that any news network either lies consistently or is truthful consistently. Don Lemon, a CNN commentator, stated the we need not do our own research. Rather, we may rely on CNN to tell us what we need to know.

I was reminded of Thomas Jefferson’s observation that the man who read nothing at all was better informed than he who reads only the newspaper. (I suspect that the same would apply today to any truncated news sources.) As the cognoscenti proclaim, “Ad fontes” (“To the sources”).

It is unfortunate that a large segment of our society censors the resources on which they rely for information predicated on political ideology. Censorship is a powerful tool used to control societies. Nations such as North Korea, China and Russia are very attentive to what citizens in those countries see and hear.

Although Justice Stewart felt certain that he “knew it” when he saw it, when it comes to truth, we fool ourselves into believing that there is a general consensus as to what it is that we see when we encounter “truth”.

When Pilate asked Jesus what is truth, I really wish that Jesus had responded by stating “what,” not “who,” “truth” is.

In the fable, Don’t Argue With A Donkey, we find the following:

The Donkey said to the Tiger, “The grass is blue.”

The Tiger replied, “No, the grass is green.”

The discussion heated up, and the two decided to submit it to arbitration.

And for this, they went before the Lion, the King of the Jungle.

Already before reaching the forest clearing, where the Lion was sitting on his throne, the Donkey began to shout, “His Highness, is it true that the grass is blue?”

The Lion replied, “True, the grass is blue.”

The Donkey hurried and continued, “The Tiger disagrees with me and contradicts and annoys me, please punish him.”

The king then declared, “The Tiger will be punished with 5 years of silence.”

The Donkey jumped cheerfully and went on his way, content and repeating, “The Grass Is Blue . . ..”

The Tiger accepted his punishment, but before he asked the Lion, “Your Majesty, why have you punished me, after all, the grass is green?”

The Lion replied, “In fact, the grass is green.”

The Tiger asked, “So why are you punishing me?”

The Lion replied, “That has nothing to do with the question of whether the grass is blue or green. The punishment is because it is not possible for a brave and intelligent creature like you to waste time arguing with a Donkey, and on top of that come and bother me with that question.”

It is tempting to try to convince others of mere perceptions of truth. One of the worst ways to waste your precious time is to argue with the fool and fanatic. If you observe them, you suddenly realize that they are not the least bothered about truth or reality. These individuals accept only their own beliefs.

Tempting though it may be, don’t engage in pointless arguments. Too often, we meet people who, blinded by ego, refuse to even attempt to understand opposing views, obstinately and desperately clinging to their own beliefs. For them, it is a zero-sum game. They must be right irrespective of the illogical position taken.

It is said, “When ignorance screams, intelligence is silent.” Your peace and quiet are too precious to waste time with those who refuse to hear. “Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you yourself will be just like him.” (Prov. 26:4)

Once during a high-profile government hearing, a critic accused John Maynard Keynes of being inconsistent. Keynes reportedly answered as follows, “When events change, I change my mind. What do you do?”

Truth is a great treasure. To know truth is the greatest privilege any man can enjoy in this life. Truth is said to be without doubt the richest treasure anyone can possess. We are promised that if we seek it, we will find it. May we pursue truth throughout our lives.