AND conspiracy theories become more threatening than some of the balderdash coming from prominent political and business leaders, how can we find some directive to get to a ‘near truth’.
'Gimme Some Truth' The Beatles' 1968
In a complex world and society where diversity in opinion is a necessity, there simply is no ultimate truth. I say necessity because it is now inarguable in science, especially evolutionary biology, that progressive life resulting in diversity, cannot be explained without taking in account we will always confront some uncertainty and unknown. And then in addition, also require some elementary form of perception to become aware of such a value-based hierarchy of interpretations of our surroundings and changes in the environment. To deal with this (regardless of species, plant or animal) we have a responsive and adaptable DNA that can shape and modify itself, perceptive to changing demands, into anything from a flowering plant to a chimpanzee (the latter sharing 98.9% of the same DNA with us).
As mentioned in book Spheres of Perception (2020) a perceptive life (and how can life not be perceptive) operates in 3 spheres — reality (or the physical), uncertainty and the unknown. In these three spheres of awareness, molecules, cells and higher cognition constantly interact to formulate new ideas in a changing world. These new and diverse ideas act as the essentials to drive progressive life, constantly adapting and adjusting itself to change. This genetic drift actively taking place across generations in a mobile and more flexible DNA than previously acknowledged. Taking only one example from a rapidly growing list for our purposes here, it has recently become evident based on the genotyping that current day survivors of the bubonic plaque still carry immune remnants and alterations from their ancestors that lived nearly 700 years ago.
In a previous publication I mentioned that if we have a fixed theory of everything in a static environment life as we know it could not have emerged or continue to evolve. So where do we turn to for our near realities and approximate truths in especially challenging if not confusing times?
Consider logic and math, our most solid pillars in support of ‘truth’. Unfortunately, these two valued supporters of our vulnerable truths have also been victims of much abuse in recent times. Think of someone trying to win an argument by saying “it has been mathematically concluded that so and so…” or the common phrase in defense of the truth in many arguments, ‘logically we must conclude...”. And closer to current day issues with climate change; “based on recent studies and backed by our calculations this and that will be the outcome with a 95% confidence value…”
Mathematician Eugenia Cheng stated in her book The Art of Logic (2018), “In a way we do access mathematical truths using emotion, but it doesn’t count as true until we verified it by using logic”.
If we furthermore take that any research, besides using math and logic, are based on:
1) What is being studied
2) How it is being studied
Mathematics help here, if only in one thing, by cutting out the ambiguity of language. Logic when supported by mathematics can subsequently further help us to eliminate the overwhelming impact of emotions in heated arguments. Imagine the principle financial stakeholder arguing with a research scientist about his disagreement with the way the research is going, even when directed by sound math and logic. The emotional impact of having the power of waving a paycheck clearly can affect the way such research will be conducted, in both logic and math.
In addition to shake the foundations set in our perceptions of reality or physical sphere (with math and logic inarguably our most secure pillars) we cannot argue (logically) that in a progressive epistemology both the what and the how that is being studied can change during the project, with many projects (especially in Pharma) at times having very high financial stakes. This has perhaps never been as important as in today’s progressive science set in the new Covid shaped world, we all regardless of our education and perceptions find ourselves in today.
So, in a current progressive society where both logic and mathematics can be challenged by rapid advances, change and the impact of domineering expressions backed by financially powerful figures where can we search for near truths?
Some may say just being rational is a good start, but it simply is not enough. Besides rationality is variable and often unbendable in the eyes of the beholder.
In conclusion, we can fall back on is our genetic origins revealing a simple truth.
First, we need to learn the art of juggling (evolving) our perceptions through the bombardment of information we daily receive in our emails, online searches, journal subscriptions and pop-ups or whatever else, in order to deliver us with personalized and workable truths. This will depend a lot on who, what and where we are.
A simple start in our search is to draw 3 circles initiating our defense of the ‘truth’. By placing (and this will vary based on your personal education, background, position and where you live and work) your own perceptions and interpretations of received input into one of the following spheres:
1) Uncertain
2) Unknown
3) Physical reality (fact or truth)
You can go as far as drawing a central core and proximate your perceptions either further away or nearer to any of your personalized placements— physical (mathematical/logical) reality, uncertain or unknown. (see Spheres of Perception, 2020 Theodore Holtzhausen).
The last step in this simple process is to learn the art of ‘near truth’ formulation. However abstract or ludicrous this may seem to the more erudite prophets of the truth, yes truth is an art. Like all creativity the beauty of an inarguable and logical truth lays in mastering the art of ridding the mind of any preconceptions and biases. Like art, the artists expression of marrying beauty with truth is severely blemished by any pretense and bias, be it political or other.
Once we become a rational master in the art of unbiased perception forming, we can place information and opinions in the above three mentioned spheres to create artful near truths.
Once you have mastered the art of ridding yourself of personal biases and gained the ability to place unblemished perceptions (unafflicted by dominating emotions or media) in the three mentioned spheres you can stand back and appreciate your masterpiece. When a counter argument disagrees attempt to also place this attack on your spheres in three spheres (or convince the opponent to do so). Agree to agree on shared physical spheres and place the uncertain and unknown where they can continue to adapt or die, and we can continue a rational argument on similar grounds. This method much more likely to not only reduce conflict but create common ground to evolve shared near truths.
Using this method, I hope you will sustain a life of more beauty and shared joy in workable near truths—whoever, whatever (vet or pet) and wherever you are.
I wish you a New Year filled with the beauty, art and near truths.
Dr Theodore Holtzhausen (veterinarian)
Comments