The Values Series | TRUTH

Image result for george washington cutting down cherry tree

When I was a kid, lying was the ultimate sin and truthfulness was a primary virtue. You might get whacked for doing something bad, but if you lied about it, you were in really deep trouble. We were to follow the example of George Washington who confessed to chopping down the cherry tree because he “could not tell a lie.” That fable is probably the only thing I learned about Washington in school, and it was repeated over and over ad nauseum. As I recall, in my earlier days, all behaviors were seen as good or bad, right or wrong, wise or dumb, etc., with nothing in between. There is a certain comfort in such binary thinking for it simplifies life, yet as recent events have shown, truth can be complicated, and thus subject to manipulation and distortion.


Situation Ethics

Early in the last century, a group of existential philosophers including Sartre, Brunner and Heidigger proposed there should be no absolute moral standards, and that one should take into account the context of an act before making an ethical judgement. Later, a group of protestant theologians expanded on that idea and declared that the presence of love is the ultimate determinant of what is ethical. One of these guys, Joseph Fletcher, in his book Situation Ethics stated, “All laws and rules and principles and ideals and norms are only contingent, only valid, if they happen to serve love.” Paul Tillich also declared that “love is the ultimate law.”

Image result for situational ethics

 
Love Conquers All

In the aftermath of the war (WWII), there was a great deal of discussion about ethics and morality, not surprising due to all the atrocities the world had seen. It was also the only war in recent history in which civilian populations were targeted, and state sponsored lying (propaganda) was accepted as the norm. Situation ethics with its emphasis on love appealed to “hormonely” endowed baby boomers since it is not a giant leap from agape to a more intimate type of love. It all came together in the 60s with love-ins, the pill, free love, Woodstock, teen pregnancies, and communes where one could share everything, often including each other. But it was also a time of anti-war protests and civil rights activism leading to the repeal of Jim Crow laws. There were fresh looks at some of our country’s previous foreign and domestic policies in terms of the effects they had on individuals. In other words, all these efforts comport with the ideals expressed in Fletcher’s version of situational ethics since they all arose out of caring about our fellow man.


White Lies

There is also a case to be made that situational ethics has had an effect on our thinking about the value of truth, as in the use of what were called “white lies.” For if truth is hurtful, is it a loving thing? For example, how should you respond when asked by an ugly person if they are ugly? There are many situations in which a one faces a similar dilemma and must decide how much they are willing to lie to avoid hurting someone. But such considerations also provide a mechanism by which one can rationalize lying. Deception has always been socially acceptable in many areas of life, e.g., team sports where faking is often part of the game. Military strategy and propaganda rely heavily on misinformation and now with the availability of digital tools, it is possible to disrupt entire societies without firing a shot, activities at which Russia has proven to be very adept.

 

Truth in Advertising?

Image result for Pure Food and Drug Act

Ever since people had something to sell, lying about their products has been common practice. The first recorded attempt to regulate advertising was the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906. Currently, the Federal Trade Commission’s “truth in advertising policy” consists of a set of rules that attempt to restrict misleading advertising, and there is also a hodgepodge of state laws that usually refer to specific or local products. In spite of all these efforts, advertisers find ways to make us believe things that are not true.

 

Social Media

Social media has become a godsend for those who want to infect large numbers of people with all kinds of lies including fake news, conspiracy theories, or slander. Fake identities can allow them to remain anonymous while sometimes doing enormous damage. Our government seems to have little interest in fixing responsibility for such content. One study concluded that information transmitted from a friend is also more likely to be accepted as valid than from other sources, which may help explain the rapid spread and wide acceptance of conspiracy theories due to the human need to share secretive information with friends.

 

Truth Be Damned

The fact checking project of the Washington Post alleges 16,241 false or misleading claims in his first 1095 days as President by our “dear leader.” I do find it reassuring to note that apparently the idea that the president could be a pathological, habitual liar is so abhorrent that even an anti-Trump paper prefers to use less personal terms to describe his casual relationship with truth (i.e., the use of the euphemism “false or misleading claims”). Conversely, I was disheartened when recently a person for whom I have a great deal of respect, responded to my comment about Trump’s lies with: “But he has done some good things too, besides all politicians lie.” I found myself questioning if we have become so inured to lying that it is no longer a big deal, and that lying is now accepted as the new norm. This seems to have been confirmed by Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz when he testified that Trump’s lies about his ”perfect” phone call were OK since his need to be re-elected was motivated by his love of country. Is that situation ethics on steroids or what?  I feel certain that back in the days when I was learning about Washington and the cherry tree incident, such attitudes towards lying would have been met with a cry of outrage heard round the world!

 

 

Research has shown that repetition of lies enhances their believability, and the more frequently they are repeated, the more likely are they to be accepted as true. Propagandists and advertisers have long been well aware of this, which accounts for our being bombarded with the same TV ad every few minutes. Likewise, talented liars make use of this principle by doubling down when caught in a lie. Studies have also demonstrated that lying becomes easier and more believable as one does more of it – practice makes perfect.

 

The Whole Truth and Nothing But the Truth

My Webster’s Dictionary defines truth as that which is true, which I don’t find very helpful. Philosophers, of course, have debated its meaning for thousands of years, but I have never been able to understand those guys/girls…which leaves me feeling like a former patient who said he knew his previous psychiatrist was exceptionally intelligent because he couldn’t understand a thing he said. One dictionary listed fact as a synonym for truth, but it seems clear to me that the concept of truth encompasses more than just facts. Truth is an ideal, a way of communicating accurately. Without it, life would be totally chaotic, and its absence would put our very survival at risk. Truth can be easily distorted, thus when in court we promise to tell not only the truth, but the whole truth and nothing but the truth.


Context Rules!

For example, in the little George and the cherry tree incident, it is concluded that George was a truth prodigy. However, supposing he noticed that someone saw him chopping down that tree, he would have been wise to say that he was confessing because he valued truth, and hopefully escape corporal punishment. Thus he would have told the truth – (that he had cut down the tree), but not the whole truth – (that he knew he had been busted) nor nothing but the truth – (for his stated reason for confessing: “I cannot tell a lie” was a lie). In like fashion, truth is made up of facts, and the omission of a fact or addition of even a minor falsehood may distort or totally change its meaning. On the other hand, facts without appropriate modifiers or context may misrepresent the truth. In other words, it is not possible to have truth without facts, but facts without truth is not only possible but may hide the truth.

 

Image result for Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech."
Truth is absolutely essential for the function of a democracy, which our founders recognized early by protecting freedom of speech with the First Amendment. Ben Franklin is quoted saying, “Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech.” Of course, this has been known by despots and authoritarian rulers throughout history. Unfortunately, there is a down side to freedom of speech for such a policy does not exclude the propagation of misinformation. In Ben’s day it was much simpler to sort out facts from fiction. We live in the information age where we are deluged with massive amounts of information. Larger segments of the population now rely on the internet for information, and it is often not clear who sent it or where it came from. The Russian election interference debacle provides us with a foretaste of what may be possible in the future, and as artificial intelligence becomes even more proficient at deception, truth could become even more elusive.

 


The First Amendment, although a protector of free speech, does place some limits (for example, physical threats, child pornography, incitement of violence, national security, etc.,), but many other nations of the world have rigid censorship over the internet and in times of political unrest have been known to shut it down. Such tactics are of course designed to hide the truth. There is currently concern about the role of Facebook in knowingly allowing misinformation to be communicated by its members. It has been pointed out by many who know about this stuff that other media are held to certain standards of maintaining a modicum of truth in their messaging while these new guys on the block have run wild. This will undoubtedly involve the familiar debates as to how far government should go in protecting the public interest without violating the right of free speech, and to what extent lying should be allowed should we even have the power to regulate it.
Truth is not easy- as a matter of fact, it is often elusive, and sometimes painful. Although I am without any particular talent in its disciplines, science has always fascinated me, largely because it is in essence simply the search for truth.

 

Oil & Water | Truth & The Belief System

Truth sometimes comes into conflict with strongly held beliefs. Consequently, scientists frequently get a bad rap. And so it was with Galileo, who was convicted of heresy, forced to recant his observation that the earth was not the center of the universe, and sentenced to spend the rest of his life on house arrest for daring to report a truth. To a lessor extent, the anti-science movement persists to this day as there are always those who refuse to accept truths that are not consistent with their beliefs or politics. This is now seen in the case of the climate change deniers who may see scientific data regarding climate change as not only a threat to their financial status, but are unwilling to contemplate the pain certain to accompany such a catastrophes that will result from climate change. The response by many of those naysayers is the time honored one of blaming the messenger and insisting it is all a sham [In my post Mother Earth, I cited an article about the mental health of scientists who have devoted their life to the search of the truth]. There are also the creationists who insist the world is only a few thousand years old in spite of mountains of evidence to the contrary because they feel the modern narrative as to how we came to be conflicts with their literal interpretation of Biblical accounts.

 


Our ability to discern what is truthful is also made difficult by our physical limitations. Our large cerebral cortex has allowed us to out-think other animals, and is largely responsible for our becoming the world’s top predator. It has also allowed us to become very curious and that curiosity has led us to attempt to figure out how everything works. In the process, we have created things that were unimaginable only a few generations ago. But when it comes to our primary special senses of sight, smell, and hearing, we are not nearly so proficient as other animals. That, along with our biases and prejudices, may explain why eyewitness accounts are so unreliable, and why it is sometimes difficult for us to perceive the truth.

 


The Cancer of Untruths | No Matter the Motivation

Previously, I noted the malignant nature of untruths, i.e., how they are so readily promulgated by well-meaning souls who mistakenly feel they are spreading truth. Such situations can also have devastating effects at a personal level on families and individuals. One such case comes to mind in which I was professionally involved many years ago. I was asked to see a man who had been accused of sexually molesting his daughter when she was very young. The daughter had filed charges against her father and he was clinically depressed. The accused father was a middle-class factory worker who had been ostracized from friends and co-workers. However, his wife and other children, all older, refused to believe this could have happened. It turned out the daughter had a history of serious emotional problems and while under hypnosis had recalled memories of the molestation. At the time, there was a great deal of interest in the recovery of memories of past traumas as a therapeutic tool, but many now feel the use of such techniques by overzealous therapists have led to a lot of false accusations. This is especially true when hypnosis is involved, for when hypnotized the subject gives up control of his thinking to the hypnotist. In this case, the father was eventually acquitted, but not before sustaining a permanent stain to his reputation and huge legal bills. Perhaps more importantly, his daughter lost a family and my patient and his wife lost a daughter.

 


So Much Information | Not Enough Knowledge

Since the onset of the information age about 50 years ago, truth has been even more difficult to find. Information is now a valuable commodity which is sold to the highest bidder, many of whom are not concerned with truth. Truth is powerful and must be hidden if a people are to be subjugated. It has been said that the truth will set you free, and indeed without truth, government of the people, by the people, and for the people would be impossible. Likewise, without a modicum of truth-telling, relationships of all kinds would suffer.
As fallible human beings we are all guilty of exaggeration on occasion, of allowing our biases to get in the way of objective evaluation of information, and we have learned to treat the average fish story as a rough approximation of the truth. Nevertheless, truth is the foundation for every kind of value we hold dear, such as honesty, integrity, reliability, loyalty, sincerity, candor, and justice, to name a few. In my opinion, mere fact checking is not enough. We need conversations about the importance of truth so that it becomes an ideal to be revered, and we all need to become seekers and speakers of truth. Perhaps we should all reread the story of little George and that famous cherry tree.

 


Next subject as suggested by a reader will be on humility, care to guess why?

 

Editor’s Note: While searching for images for this post, I found it ironic to discover that the story of George Washington and the cherry tree is a myth (another nice word for a lie). How this fable was created and gained such credibility that it was taught in school for decades is an interesting story from Brain Food. Score 1 for technology and truth detecting 🙂  However, I guess the bigger question for situational ethicists would be whether the story of little George and the cherry tree was motivated by love (love of the truth and a way to provide little kids with a story they would remember about how important it is to tell the truth). Oh…Washington didn’t have wooden teeth either (that’s another thing I was taught in school about Washington)! Brain Food dispelled that myth, too! Until next time…comment, share, and post. Eshrink ROCKS!

CLIMATE CHANGE, A BIG DEAL?

When I was a kid I enjoyed listening to the sound of train whistles. As they approached our small midwestern town, those smoke belching monsters would unleash a chorus of ear splitting blasts that would cascade into a mournful crescendo heard for miles, then fade away as they headed out into the distance. At night, those whistles became a haunting lullaby leaving a kid to drift off with wonder as to where that train was going, what it was carrying, and what it would feel like to be in charge of all that power.

train dads blog
Thirty or so years later, I returned to that little town of my youth, and found there was very little train traffic. There is still one train which appears periodically and toots its electric horn. It tries to mimic the steam whistles of old, but fails miserably. It runs a very short route from a strip mine a few miles south to a coal fed power plant just a few miles up the road. On a couple of occasions, I have been stuck at a railroad crossing and watched as a long string of cars neatly filled with sized lumps of coal head towards huge furnaces that will produce enough steam to power generators sending millions of volts of electricity to a large area of the country, not the least of which is my house.
On the most recent of such encounters, I found myself wondering how many tons of CO2 would be sent into the atmosphere by that coal. Later, I would find the plant had used 1,716,286 tons of coal in 2017. As I sat there with my car idling and the interior a comfortable 70 degrees while outside it was nearly 90, I thought about all this climate stuff and chastised myself for having recently bought the polluter I was driving. Then it occurred to me that if I drove an electric car, I would still need the electricity produced by that coal to charge the battery. Then came the reminiscences of the oppressive feelings associated with similar hot days of my youth and those nights of attempting to sleep while bathed in sweat. Would I be willing to return to those “good old days?” Truthfully, the thought of my air conditioner failing terrifies me.

the sopranos

In the TV series, “The Sopranos” Tony turns down the advances of a seductive female with whom he is negotiating a business deal by saying: “I never shit where I eat.” We humans are pretty smart and we do a lot of good things, but we don’t very often heed Tony’s advice for it seems that progress has become almost synonymous with environmental degradation. In order to make life easier, we produce all kinds of things. In the process, we devour natural resources, produce mountains of waste, and poison our habitat. It requires a great deal of energy to make all that stuff, and even more to utilize it. Not to worry, for the earth has been collecting and burying the carcasses of extinct critters, trees, and plants for millions of years. It burns easily, is accessible, and produces enough energy to satisfy nearly any need.

 

Coal is King

Coal was the most plentiful, easiest to harvest, and therefore cheapest of the fossil fuels. There is evidence that coal was used in manufacturing during the bronze age, but since the advent of the industrial age vast quantities have been used not just for manufacturing but also for heating and the generation of electricity. The major problem with coal was that it was dirty. The steam engines used to power locomotives and the earliest automobiles exuded large amounts of black smoke and sticky soot. That problem of powering rolling stock was solved with the invention of the internal combustion engine as the combustion of highly volatile petroleum products were largely invisible. With the insatiable demands for energy to make stuff and provide creature comforts, coal the cheapest and most available source became king, but there was still that problem with smoke and soot which not only soiled everything, but made it hard to breathe.

smoke stacks 1970s

The Law of Unintended Consequences

Since everything in nature is interconnected, whenever we attempt to fix one thing, we usually screw up something else. The way we dealt with the emissions from coal is an excellent example of such a process. The yucky smoke and ash problem was solved by sending it high in the sky via tall chimneys. In some areas of the country, smokestacks reached over 1,000 feet. They accomplished their purpose, but unfortunately by the 1970s trees were dying and fish were disappearing from lakes and streams in the northeastern U.S. There was also the problem of corrosion and rusting of exposed metal structures, such as bridges. It was eventually determined the cause was “acid rain” caused by smokestack emissions from the industrial Midwest.

acid rain

In 1982, at the height of the debates about acid rain, our community gained its 15 minutes of fame when two intrepid green-peace protesters decided to protest by climbing 800 feet to the top of one of our stacks and stayed there for three days.
The emissions from the burning of coal contain sulfur dioxide and nitric oxides which when released in the upper atmosphere react to the sun’s rays to form sulfuric and nitric acids which are carried in clouds, usually in an easterly direction.

 

This problem found a solution in “scrubbers” placed inside the stacks to capture those chemicals which was very cool, but does nothing about the massive amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2) liberated from billions of tons of coal. To date, no one has found a solution for that problem. As a matter of fact, the scrubbers installed have apparently not been very effective on our old power plant built in 1957, and the plant is scheduled to be closed in a year. Locally, there will be no dancing in the streets for the plant has been a major employer for an already depressed area. The economic impact will likely affect many more. Will there be any market for coal from that mine, and will the train tracks which only go from the mine to the plant be taken up? If we ever do decide to get off our butts and do something about climate change there will be many similar scenarios in which people will fear more for their immediate well-being than the effects of global warming.

Cuyahoga River Fire 1952

This is actually a picture from the Cuyahoga River fire in 1952. Fun fact: there are no pictures from the 1969 fire.

There have always been tree huggers, but the environmental movement got a big shot in the arm when the Cuyahoga River caught fire in 1969 (see the original report at this link). The river ran through an area of heavy industry in Cleveland, and the incident gained international attention. Many feel it provided the impetus for the formation of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) a year later. That agency has registered some successes. The Cuyahoga River is no longer flammable and people now even fish its waters. The acid rain problem is much improved, and the banning of chlorofluorocarbons  (link to article in Scientific American about CFCs) in spray cans has resulted in closure of the hole in the ozone layer, but carbon dioxide (CO2), along with its cousin methane, the chief culprits of greenhouse gases continue to accumulate. As a matter of fact, it has been documented there has been a 45% increase in the atmospheric level of carbon dioxide since the beginning of the industrial revolution.

The EPA does not garner a lot of support these days. Our President appointed an avowed climate denier, Scott Pruit, as head of the agency. After he left in disgrace, he was replaced by a former lobbyist for the coal industry (Andrew Wheeler), who had even led in filing suit against the EPA prior to joining its ranks – not surprising since one of Trump’s campaign promises was to revitalize the coal industry. Of course, it is no secret that the President is no fan of all this environmental stuff. He has characterized the climate change evidence as a hoax most likely perpetrated by the Chinese. One of his first acts after taking office was the announcement of his intent to pull out of the Paris accords regarding climate change. Only a few days ago the Vice President Pence in a television interview refused to agree that climate change was a serious problem.

 

Science is in need of a good PR Campaign

Science has been getting a bad rap recently. Respect for scientists and more importantly trust in their findings seems to have faded. Too many mothers now reject scientific evidence of the safety and effectiveness of vaccines, and in their zeal to protect their children put them at risk. There appears to be a resurgence of antipathy from “creationists” toward those who study evolution. Some see scientists as godless “intellectual elite” groupies with liberal political agendas consequently; climate change, which many including myself believe to be the most pressing issue of our time, has become politicized with a bit of help from the fossil fuel industry. Thus, in spite of mountains of data confirming we are all at risk from extreme man-made global warming, climate change deniers abound.

In its purest form science is a search for facts. Truth is generally a conclusion based on a collection of facts. At least that is my definition for whatever that is worth. It has also been said that facts answer the questions of where, when, and how; while truth seeks to understand why.

Unfortunately, in this day of social media dominance which makes it easy to promulgate “alternative facts,” conspiracy theories, innuendos, distortions, and altered descriptions of all kinds, truth is not always easily available. The climate deniers initially debunked facts by quoting one scientist of dubious reputation who wrote it all off as normal fluctuations of weather patterns. When he was discredited and data accumulated, many acknowledged there might be a problem in the distant future, but continued to insist it had nothing to do with human activity consequently; nothing could be done about it.

 
The scientific method attempts to screen emotional biases from research consequently; scientists may at first glance appear to be stoic and uncaring. There is not much touchy-feely stuff in most scientific papers, so imagine my surprise when I recently came across an article written by David Corn in the August issue of Mother Jones titled “Weight of the World” which concerned reports on the mental status of a group of climate scientists. The story was based on interviews with many academic scientists who study climate.

scientific-method-poster

 

The common theme through all these interviews with climate scientists was of frustration, anxiety and depression in various degrees. One scholar who was studying the effects of ocean temperatures on climate became clinically depressed. Another reported that she had decided she would not have any children because of her concerns as to the type of world in which they would live.

 

One of the unwritten tenets of scientific endeavor is that one should follow the facts wherever they lead regardless of their political or religious beliefs. The goal should always be to present facts and the presumption is that the facts will speak for themselves. The frustration shared by these people who have dedicated their lives to the study of climate is the feeling that the facts regarding the seriousness, and even the existence of climate change, are not being heard.
Certainly, there are groups and individuals who have a financial or political stake in the denial of climate change, and some like myself, who worry about giving up their air conditioning and all that other energy gobbling stuff I have come to enjoy. Those who warn us of the climate change crisis are accused by many of being duped by unseen forces, influenced by outside influences, or often as simply a bunch of “chicken littles” (i.e. publicity seeking alarmists who overstate the problem).

 
The source of the anger, frustration, and hopelessness expressed by these highly respected researchers however was the feeling that worse than challenging their findings was the feeling that no one was even listening to their concerns. Such situations have been referred to as the Cassandra syndrome, so named for a goddess in Greek mythology who was given the gift of prophecy but received a curse which prevented anyone from believing her.

 

Is Ignorance Bliss?

Indeed, it does seem that many don’t even bother to refute their findings, but just simply ignore them. One cannot help but wonder if there is also a blame the messenger scenario involvement. It is becoming more difficult to deny the existence of the problem as we witness prophecies of more frequent and more severe climate related disasters come to pass. Average temperatures continue to rise and as they do there are more frequent and serious floods, droughts, fires, and storms throughout the world. Sea levels are rising. Glaciers are melting, massive ice sheets are falling into the sea. Arctic permafrost is melting and expected to release even more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. For those who would listen it should be obvious that these events are simply previews of coming attractions, and that global warming is not a future event but is already here. We only need look and we will see that millions are already suffering.

 

We are told that an increase in average global temperatures of more that 2 degrees will take us beyond the point of no return, yet to date our efforts to do something about it is like emptying a bathtub with a teaspoon. As we monitor these events it appears that previous predictions of the pace of such warming have been underestimated. We continue to pollute, and to destroy nature’s remedies as for example the logging and burning which is especially prevalent in the Amazon rain forest. Trees not only absorb CO2 but use it to produce oxygen, that precious gas without which we cannot live for more than a few minutes.  The world population continues to increase and improved standards of living in developing countries results in more flesh eaters consequently; more animals raised for food which are a major source of methane a major greenhouse gas.

Mother Earth will survive. Will we?

Most climatologists’ predictions extend only for a few decades, but what about farther down the road. I have grandchildren and have hope that I will still be around long enough to meet my great grandchildren, but I wonder what their world will be like and what travails they will face, and if that will be the last generation of homo sapiens on the planet. Lest you think we are immune from extinction, let me remind you that we are one of many species descended from common ancestors who no longer exist. And that there are thousands of species of animals and plants that are now extinct as a result of changes in their environments. The Neanderthals, our closest relatives, lived in Europe for 40, 000 years, then mysteriously disappeared, some theorize due to climate change.

 

The irreverent George Carlin in one of his stand-up routines cynically reassured us that the earth would do just fine without us,  He seems to have been one of the first to have the audacity to suggest extinction a possibility.

 

So far, we have managed to adapt to changes with the help of our king-sized brains, but as mammals we are quite fragile. We are susceptible to a variety of toxic substances. Our ability to tolerate drastic changes in our environment is quite limited. We cannot live with body temperature fluctuations of more than a few degrees, and require continuous immersion in an oxygen atmosphere. We cannot live long without water and are susceptible to more fatal illnesses than most other creatures. In spite of all our vulnerabilities, when faced with the prospect of an uninhabitable planet, little mention is made of the possibility of the extinction of the human race.
lamar-smith-climate-change-denier-voters-1495136715Those scientists who warn us of what is to come should by honored as heroes. We do honor others such as “first responders” who respond to disasters however give little credence to those who attempt to prevent them. I suffered through the most recent so-called democratic presidential debate and saw little evidence of their concern about the state of our planet. Only one in that gang of candidates, Jay Inslee the governor of Washington, who has made climate change his number one priority, and other than for him little was said on the subject. As for the moderators, their contribution was to ask at the very end of the debate for a show of hands as to how many believed climate change was a serious problem. They all raised their hands, but there was no discussion of the subject and neither the moderators or the candidates other than Inslee brought up the issue during that painful 2 hour marathon.

 
According to the latest figures available nearly 75% of Americans identify themselves as Christian. As such we are taught to give thanks for all that God has provided yet it appears to me that our obligation of stewardship over all that which we have been given gets little attention in our worship services. Likewise, the news media makes casual mention in their reporting of news regarding climate change which in my opinion deserve front page coverage. After all, if there are no longer people on the planet all those issues will be irrelevant.

 
A few years ago Al Gore produced a movie titled “An Inconvenient Truth” which could hardly be considered a blockbuster, yet that title fits perfectly with what we see today. In order to avoid catastrophic effects to the planet there must be an awakening of the world’s population. We must avoid soft-pedaling information about the problem and talk about its consequence in stark terms. We need to not only hear but listen to those knowledgeable about our environment. As a matter of fact, their messages should be amplified so that they can be heard throughout the world.  Our PR and advertising experts have demonstrated their ability to convince the populace of anything.  I am reminded of the effectiveness of efforts to diminish the use of tobacco which motivated many including myself to quit.  Certainly, a condition which threatens the well being and indeed the very existence of the entire human race should deserve equal attention.

 
We need to look beyond this century for as an old guy who has put in the time I can attest to the fact that 80 years is not a long time. We need to use the term extinction (extinction of the human race) in our conversation even though it may produce some feelings of panic (maybe not such a bad thing).

 

Nothing Unites Humans Like a Common Enemy

There are many forces which conspire to keep us at odds with each other, and it has long been known that the easiest way to unite people is to find a common enemy or cause. Perhaps if we could all feel equally threatened we could put away all that trivial stuff and concentrate on saving our planet…actually, saving the human race.

 

It seems to me that legacy does not occupy the thoughts of many these days.  Perhaps we are so caught up in the pace of change that we are unable to visualize the future, and consequently predict what tools will be needed, or simply that we are so preoccupied with the here and now that thoughts of the future beyond our immediate family don’t occur.   We who who have left our carbon footprints have one last opportunity to make amends for what we have done.

 

Ignorance is no longer a valid excuse.

Editor’s Note: If you’re feeling helpless, check out these two organizations I discovered during my research. Stay informed. Voice your concern. Sign the petition.

https://www.ucsusa.org/what-can-i-do-about-climate-change

http://www.climatenetwork.org/

P.S. There’s even a rebel group called Extinction Rebellion for the rabid activists.

 

PANTS ON FIRE: the truth about truthfulness

Since our fearless leader arrived on the scene, there has been much debate over the matter of truthfulness. Though the word truth may not be as fashionable as it once was, it is still used a great deal in everyday language. I have my own ideas about the definition of the word, but etymologists tell us language is in a constant state of flux. With that in mind I decided to look up the definition of the word to see if its meaning had changed during the past 80 or so years. It seemed to not have changed appreciatively since the day a few decades ago when I lied about throwing a hatchet at my brother.
The definitions of the word “truth” I found confusing in most cases; for example, one was “the quality or state of being true,”  which I did not find to be helpful. It reminded me of the meaningless cliche “it is what it is.” However, I was pleased to learn that some of the synonyms used george-washington-cherry-treefor truth, such as candor, honesty, and sincerity, are still associated with the word. Along with a few million other kids I was indoctrinated with the fable of George Washington and the cherry tree. The moral of that story was very clear that lying about the deed was as bad or worse that the deed itself. To that end when my father confronted me about a misdeed, and said “don’t lie to me” I soon learned that I was more likely to escape corporal punishment if I confessed.

 

Truthfulness in the “good ole days”

According to my recollection, truthfulness was highly regarded in those days; although there were situations in which lying was condoned. For example, horse traders, much as the used car salesmen of today, were famously expected to lie. In those days I am told that transactions involving horses were seen as a competition testing the ability of the buyer or trader to judge horses, and the rules about truthfulness were suspended. In most situations however; truthfulness was considered a virtue and liars were regarded as on the same level as wife beaters.
My indoctrination into those ideas about truth was successful, and I value them even today, although I must confess that I have transgressed a few times. In most cases I have rationalized by telling myself they are only white lies, minor exaggerations, or embellishments, and that there are times when truth can be hurtful. As a consequence, I tend to classify lies as to their size in order to excuse my behavior. However, according to the Smith classification, any prevarication uttered by the most powerful man in the world is a whopper with the potential of dire consequences for the entire world.

I Don’t Care if Trump Lies

With all that in mind, you can imagine my chagrin when I ran across an article in the January 23 issue of “The Daily Wire” titled 5 REASONS I DON’T CARE IF TRUMP LIES. It was written by John Nolte who had previously been editor of the far right web based Breitbart News which was also the former home of Steve Bannon, Mr. Trump’s advisor. Mr. Nolte justifies the lying by using “the old everybody does it” strategy we used in grade school by saying: “Politicians lie. That is what they do.” He goes on to say “In politics lying is a tactic, and if you don’t use that tactic, you’re screwed.” 19c05de8e57fda9170ee3a1e7a95e269How many times in history have we heard that. If indeed the most talented at lying have an advantage at the polls, it might explain why there appears to be so much dissatisfaction about the performance of our elected officials. Nolte is not so charitable with the major news outlets that he describes as “evil” due to their dishonesty, but assures us that “I will not lie.” Yes, I am sure George Washington would be pleased to know someone is following in his footsteps.

Fake News. Confirmation Bias. The Internet Conundrum.

4e6661deeb79365cf2ad34752f12c3f7The term “fake news” has been bandied about a lot lately, but that seems to me an oxymoron. If it is fake, it is simply a lie, certainly not news. No matter what it is called, the internet has become a fertile field for its growth. It allows any individual to send whatever lie he chooses with impunity to large numbers of people who are then capable of spreading it to others like an epidemic. The more outrageous or unusual the story, the more likely it is to be widely dispersed. The volume of such misinformation is such that there is something for everybody so that a person is more likely to believe something if it supports his own beliefs or prejudices, and discard that with which he disagrees. This has been called the confirmation bias.
As he continues to surf the web, he will be drawn to those sites, truthful or not, which confirm his beliefs. So armed, he becomes even more entrenched in his opinions and more unlikely to listen to alternative ideas. In my opinion this is one of the major contributors to our divisiveness. Unfortunately his conclusions may have been influenced by faulty evidence.

In an optimistic essay in the December 29, 2011 issue of the Atlantic, by Rebecca Rosen titled TRUTH, LIES and the INTERNET, she acknowledges that the internet is a repository for much misinformation, but comforts us by insisting “the internet has brought a golden age of Fact Checking,” and goes on to say “…..the good news is that the Internet is nurturing accuracy.”

So much for prophecies: here we are six years later with the development of wonderfully complex lie machines, which are not only capable of reaching millions of people, but can actually tailor their lies to appeal to certain groups or even individuals. In the face of such onslaughts, all the fact checkers in the world could not keep up with their output.
Not only has the internet provided a convenient platform for the delivery of lies, new techniques such as the twitterbot are now used to overwhelm and prevent access by competing messages.

In contrast to the Atlantic article, Richard Clarke’s book, Cyber Warfare has turned out to be prophetic. He had warned in his book that the US was sorely lacking in preparedness for cyberattacks. Russia has proven him correct in his assessment by their role in attempting to undermine our electoral process. I have heard several comments on TV which attempt to assure us that the outcome of the election was not affected by these cyberattacks; however I find it hard to believe that anyone could be certain of that since there are so many intangibles which may affect such outcomes.

Whatever the effects they may have had on the outcome of the election, the specter of even the possibility of an illegitimate presidency or treasonous staff members is a win for the Russians due to the loss of confidence in the process. Slanderous comments about various politicians are accepted as fact by some which further undermines the trust in our system. Attitudes so developed may also result in a cynicism about our government which may discourage our brightest and most dedicated from a career in public service.

Facts. The truth. The whole truth. And nothing but the truth.

When testifying in a court of law all people must swear to tell “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”. This oath is said to have been traced to the 13th century. Those guys must have been pretty smart, for they already were aware of how one could make a lie appear to be the truth. Unfortunately, counterfeit truth tellers are not required to take such an oath in ordinary situations. They can avoid telling the “whole” truth by taking something out of context, usually a word or modifying phrase that changes the meaning of what is said. The “nothing but the truth” phrase forbids the mixing in a lie or two which can also change the gist of the message. Such strategies seem to me to be used more frequently now than in days past.

190583Beliefs and opinions are not facts. Facts are a necessary component of truth; however truth is more than that. Truth requires an understanding of the meaning of the facts, their relevance to the issue at hand, and their context. Truth is necessary for our survival. Truth is essential for development of trust. Without trust, chaos reigns and society disintegrates. Truth is honest, sincere, and respectful. Truth is especially important in today’s messy world, but currently seems to be in short supply.
Since I began this essay, I noted that Time Magazine featured a lead article on truthfulness. Although I was initially dismayed to have been scooped, I was nevertheless heartened that the issue is getting the attention it deserves. Of course lying is not a recent development.  It has been said that THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE which leads one to ponder the question of the effect of its absence.   Plato addressed its seriousness a bit before my tenure when he said:
“FALSE WORDS ARE NOT ONLY EVIL IN THEMSELVES, BUT THEY INFECT THE SOUL WITH EVIL.