Is Truth Dead?

The Race to the Bottom in America

What does Trump’s Presidency say to the World?

If you can just be non-political for the moment, — okay five minutes. What has the election of Trump shown to the world?

I think for most of us, who are not American, those of us who are simply witnesses, –Trump’s election signals that humans can be used, motivated and impelled to perform acts and to sanction acts that would normally be considered egregious, inhuman, and in many cases, illegal.

To those of us who have no stake in having been a Democrat or a Republican, we base our considered opinion on what is observable, viewed by ourselves, with our own eyes and ears. Of course we’re aware of the slant that the media, either left or right, has on what is presented. That’s why, and I can only speak for myself, I engage and engaged in conversations with Americans from across the political spectrum, to listen to their opinions, and to attempt to filter the educated and considered, from the ignorant and highly partisan.

There is no point in listening to an echo changer for your own opinion. It offers nothing new. What is essential though, is the truth. If we cannot even agree on what is factual, then how is there going to be any way in which to determine what is rational, logical or reasonable?

How does a democracy even exist?

You can lie to yourself and ignore the facts. Of course, that will enable either party, either political or ethical stripe to affirm what they already believe. That’s easy. That’s convenient, and that comforts the psyche. I mean who wants to determine that their cause is a lie, that they’ve been foolish, or ignorant?

No one.

Yet, that is exactly what is happening today in the United States. Two groups of people hold opinions. Very few hold no opinion. People want to validate their own truth. So, there is Fox, for example, or Truth Social on the one hand, — and on the other there is CNN or MSNBC. What do we learn, as an outside viewer when we weigh the positions taken?

First, it requires neither rose-coloured glasses or jaundiced eyes.

So, how does one do this? First, we need facts. Without facts, any opinion will be incorrect. How could it not be? But facts are not simply observable. Situations are not presented, except possibly where violence on the one hand, or complete passivity on the other is the obvious. We reach conclusions based on the filters that we use to perceive.

If we don’t address the fact that our perceptions are filtered, and remove those filters before viewing, it will be impossible to conclude that our assertions are not modified in some way by our preconceptions, bias or lack of knowledge.

Let’s face it. Most people view their world totally subjectively, no different than they do their religiosity. Unwilling to look at the objectively evidence as to whether there is any evidence for ‘belief’, people fall back on ‘nurture’, (how their upbringing affected their beliefs) and on group-think, Irving Janis’ theory that, refers to a psychological phenomenon where a group prioritizes reaching consensus over critically evaluating information, leading to poor decision-making.

If one is raised in a home and community of like-mindedness and the celebration of ‘affinity’, where one is raised by parents and within a community where the acquisition of data, ‘information as facts’ and their analysis, leads one to a hypothesis, a probabilistic determination, to then be tested, validated and replicated, or a determination of the veracity of one’s assertions, one will either have an opinion, which essentially suggests that either one seeks knowledge, or one succumbs to ignorance.

Worse, if one simply turns on a television in order to reach a subjective truth, one is immediately reaching conclusions, not based on objective facts, at least in most cases, but based on the subjective representation or misrepresentation of the ‘facts’.

All this occurs prior to any analysis by the individual.

I have, to some degree, a more unique view of perceiving ‘facts’, as I was an investigator for almost thirty years. Trained in both forensic investigation and criminal investigative techniques, my sole role was to reach determinations of facts. I also was a part of a team of investigators who would be subject to understanding their own biases and those of others within the group.

As the outcomes would possibly illuminate and include criminal activities, it was imperative that bias, group-think, or lack of data and its analysis not occur. A trained psychologist would sit down after each case ‘determination’ was made, to ensure that decisions reached or recommendations made, met the strict rule of requisite proof.

I was also privy to a somewhat unique experience in that I taught ethics and conflict resolution, which provided me with better lenses to assess my own potential blind spots. In aggregate, it took me 43 years to hone the necessary attributes, assuming that I had all the unbiased and unfiltered information for analysis.

So Where are We?

I suppose the question is rhetorical, when one looks at how the average person forms an opinion and acts on it. The vast majority of people are biased, therefore the decisions they reach will be affected by that bias.

Most people, and I say this without any inference, don’t ‘seek’ the truth. They are happy with their opinions and have fallen into a pattern of belief. “I get my news from Fox” or “I get my news from CNN.” The reality is that neither is entirely objective, and some would say that one is entirely subjective. Both still represent an ‘interest’ group, which provides the capital through which that company survives and thrives.

What is occurring today is not the seeking of truth, but the search for viewership and profits. So the question remains, whose interest(s) are being sought and managed by these media outlets? Not only is seeking the truth, not the intent, but achieving buy in from the voting electorate and the attainment of power, is.

The juxtaposition of two diametrically opposite views, that mirror the interests of those politically who hold to a ‘position’ rather than the truth, is what most people apparently want and understand. For these groups, there is no real objective truth.

In fact, by being contrary and stoking the emotions of the vested viewer’s bias, they, the media outlets, actually create both the opinions, and indirectly stoke the ‘actions’ that flow from those opinions.

So, here we are. Feeding the most base, uninformed and willfully ignorant, or if not, at least the laziest of the public.

Today, the race is to the bottom. A race to reach what is likely a predetermined position and bias. One that leads to conclusions of what constitutes fact, based on anything but. Emotions rule, — acts become justifications to a position held, — not truth.

Anger, hate, racism, sexism, misogyny, ageism, and race to the emotional bottom is what follows.

And this IS America today.

As an observer, as an outsider, what I see are two willfully ignorant camps, taking positions, defending them, first vocally and now physically in defence of what may well be either lies or a least willful stupidity.

I have never been more glad that I was trained to think and rationalize, based on science and the scientific methodology, and the application of truth, to the greatest extent possible.