"Finding Truth"

The following is an exert from Session Eight in the b4Wolrdview course entitled "Finding Truth". I have researched thoroughly this topic and I believe this course will have the most extensive discussion on steps we must take to know what is true without using an established orientation such as theology and philosophy. Most people may say that the path to truth is too deep, too theoretical, or just too anything to have an excuse to not take it seriously. Many would rather be entertained by "finding Nemo" or "finding Dory". If you focus on what follows and think about it with fresh brain eyes, it could be transforming. That is what we expect from attentive students of b4Worldview.

******************************************************************************
I have a friend in his 70's. He has had a successful life according to the world's standards. While his body is beginning to fail him, he struggles more with emotional angst. When I ask him what troubles him, he responds, "I just want to know what is true." When I ask him what he is doing about that challenge, he says, "I don't even know where to start." At b4Worldview we are passionate about one thing, when you finish this course you will never be able to say that again in your entire life.

 In session 6 we spent a lot of time discussing truth in the various ways people view it. Remember, some see truth as relative and some as absolute. That is, truth about an object can be whatever someone or some culture decides it is based on their inferences from what they observe about the object in certain situations. This is called relative truth. The opposite view of truth is that truth about an object is stable across time and situations and is not dependent on what anyone might physically observe and infer about the object. This is absolute truth and sometimes called “true north.” North is north and it doesn’t matter who you ask or when you ask them. One’s opinion, regardless of how things look and how much they believe otherwise, does not change where north is.

Sometimes, for people like John F Kennedy Jr, which way is up can mean life or death. One night, thinking he was flying his plane up into the sky, disregarding his instrument panel and going on what he felt to be true, John Jr flew his plane into the ocean, killing everyone on board.

We also discussed truth in terms of whether choices we make are right or not. In this instance we said that choices are preferential when the outcomes of each choice have the same effect, like two routes to town that get you there with the same effort and in the same amount of time. We also said choices may be competing. In this case one choice is considered right because it produces a “better” outcome than the other choice.

As we mentioned people take different paths to believe what is true. People who think truth is relative tend to focus more on how using their edio or head knowledge can show them what they should believe is true. While rarely denying their existence, they depend on core assumptions. They tend to trust their ability to create valid arguments about an object by gaining more edio knowledge. Accepting that part of their beliefs is based on evidence they cannot prove (faith), people who depend on truth as relative do not consider it necessary or worthwhile to debate or prove their core assumptions.

While there may be times and situations where our choices are preferential and will seem relative, we see all around us where there are some choices in life where there is only one right answer. It is to these choices that this session is dedicated. That is, when we are faced with choices about what is right or true, how do we determine which are true, since scientific inference from physical evidence can never be 100% conclusive?

Before we look at the ways to examine core assumptions and other beliefs about truth that cannot be proven solely by eido knowledge and scientific inquiry, think a moment about where you think your core assumptions or initial beliefs come from. Let me ask it this way, which of the following best represents where you get your starting point beliefs that you never really think about or question or feel a need to prove.

A. You accept what people in authority tell you
B. You trust what people you love tell you
C. Your use your natural instincts or intuition
D. You accept what is normal for your culture (family and community)

(here the student is taken down a different discussion depending on their answer)

We are going to spend a little time looking at a way to determine and test what you believe to be true when science is not enough to give you conclusive evidence. But before we begin this discussion, let me ask you how important it is for you to know “true north”. Pick the statement about “truth north” that best represents where you are right now relative to the role true north plays in your life.

“Truth north” is 

A. Not necessary for daily life

B. Is always subjective

C. Available for me to know if I sincerely seek it

(again the student is engaged differently based on their answer)

If there was a prescription for finding absolute truth or true north, everyone would be “singing the same tune”, so to speak, and we all would agree on what is right and what is wrong. However, it is not that simple. You see disagreement everywhere on what is right or true. 

The confusion we have over truth starts with the meaning of truth. The simple definition of truth is “fact”. However, when we look at the meaning of “fact” we see that it means “true.” This is a circular argument for the meaning of “truth” and is not helpful. There have been many attempts to define truth in theology and philosophy. While these approaches produce similar outcomes for the definition of truth, they do not clearly and fully say exactly the same thing about truth. So let us look at what we may get for a meaning of truth if we combine the approaches and settle on one meaning.

For our purposes we will say that what is true about an object is

“The rightful disclosure of the object's original design.”

This idea of “finding true north” about some object means that we will have revealed to us a quality of the object that is in accordance with the design of the object. Think about it. A real estate appraiser needs to know the true size of a building. He or she will make attempts at measuring the dimensions, but will ultimately ask if there is a blueprint of the building they can use. Here they would look at the design (or a rightful disclosure) and obtain the dimensions of the building in accordance with the architect’s intent. True size of the building is best known by looking at the plans. Some things about the building are not even in the plans but reside only in the mind of the architect. What is the purpose of the building? How is it supposed to function during different kinds of events in it? The best way to know truth about the building is to know the architect and be able to trust what he/she tells us about the building. Then we can fully know what is “true north” about the building.

This is a simple example and works well for objects that physically exist designed by a person. But what about abstract objects, like love, or aspects of our material world, like the oceans, that have existed for so long we only have ancient accounts of its origination. We may often think, what is “true love?” What are the qualities of love that can be rightfully disclosed and in accordance with the author or originator of love? We may not think about love in that way. We may think that one person creates love for another, but do they really? They may have love for another, but are they the author of the object called “love”? There are many poeple who love. Which person originated it? Does “love’ itself have an originator and a willful design?

Let’s stop here for a minute. You may be thinking, “how do we know that this meaning of “truth” is true?” That’s a very good question. This gets us back to core assumptions. Remember, "everything we believe to be true, but we do not question or try to prove" is a core assumption. This definition is given to us across time by many people who have studied “truth”. But why are they right about truth. We find we cannot even discuss the topic of “truth” if we do not all have the same core assumption about what truth means. The dictionary is full of words that we never prove their definition, but we accept them as true. Instead of just throwing our hands up in futility, which is what many philosophers eventually do, lets’ highlight the different core assumptions about what is truth so you can see for yourself where your core assumption about truth fits in the approaches to finding “true north.” 

These are the questions that sit at the very basis of finding “true north”. 

First, when you want to know “true north” about an object, you must believe either

1. The object has no originator.

OR

2. The object has an originator who has a purpose and design for the object.

Then you must make another choice. Will you infer qualities about the object based on

1. knowledge (both eido and gnosis) you have as you observe the object.

OR

2. knowledge (both edio and gnosis) you have about the originator of the object.

Obviously, if you do not assume there is an originator of the object, you can only infer qualities of an object from knowledge you have of the object. All options involve inferences we make from both kinds of knowledge. The question is, what are we making inferences about, the object or the originator of the object? The point is that what is true will be either a reliance or trust you have in your ability to infer through your observation or a reliance (trust) in the character and competency of the originator of the object. That is the only two choices you have in finding “true north.”

You must believe that you have sufficient vision to see perfectly the qualities of an object or the originator of the object must reveal the qualities of the object to you. This is a key core assumption. The sponsors of b4Worldview agree with Augustine, an ancient scholar who said that even if you have perfect vision, you could not see the beautiful objects in a room if the room is immersed in darkness. Only until light is shown to reveal the objects can we receive their full beauty. We cannot tell you what to believe, but we can tell you that those are the only two choices you have – truth about an object is gained by observation through your efforts or revealed to you through the will of the originator of the object. The choice you make here determines almost every core assumption you have about life and influences whether you live it to its fullest.

No object is more important to know the truth about than the object called “self”. This fork in the road about truth applies here too. You either know what is true about yourself by inferences you make by observing yourself or you know truth about yourself from what the originator of you chooses to reveal to you about you. Of course, you have to first agree on who your originator is. It should be obvious you did not create yourself 

Finding truth requires inferences and 

inferences always involve a combination of eido and gnosis knowledge. 

As we discussed earlier, people are different from each other and are flawed in ways in which they view themselves and objects in the world around them. If we really want to find “true north” about important objects in our life, guidelines for inferences that will make us more objective and less subject to our biases, filters, and limitations would be a good start. So, in this session I will give you some principles for finding true north that can offset some of the flaws in your personal and human nature. You will only get better at knowing what is right as you practice applying these ideas. 

But, before we dive into principles of objective inference, lets revisit your own core assumptions about truth. We can review what you have shared with us so far through your responses to questions we have asked.

(if you have taken the course, we know your core assumptions regarding relative and absolute truth and would discuss them with you here)

We have discussed the importance of whether you typically view truth as absolute or relative. We have explored the degree you rely on physical evidence and science or invisible evidence called faith. Your core assumptions on truth and faith are vital to how you view almost everything. Based on what we have learned about you so far, we can place you on a chart that looks like this, putting you in a spot that corresponds to what you have said you believe about truth and faith. I want to emphasize to you again, this exercise is not about judging you. Our objective in this course is to help you clarify what your core assumptions are that lead to your worldviews. 

Challenging your assumptions highlight the opportunities for change you feel may be helpful in making your life and those around you more successful. Now lets see how your core assumptions place you on this chart.

******************************************************************************

The rest of this Session explores four guidelines to examining your core assumptions about truth. When we have the course all done, maybe its something you can try. It will be a great source of pondering if nothing else ......