Hello, Otterites! Robert here with yet another edition of Wobert Wednesday.
Going to talk about some more philosophy. Was listening to another Stephen Hicks Open College episode the other day, and he was talking about Thales, who was essentially the father of Philosophy a few hundred years before even Socrates. Thales apparently got into trouble over the statements: “The first principle and basic nature of all things is water”, and “All things are full of gods.” The podcast had a bit in it about what is real and of substance, which these two statements kind of hint at.
That got me to thinking, which can be a dangerous thing.
What is real and how do we know it?
What is truth and how do we know that?
It seems to me that on an absolute basis, using our physical senses, we can’t know the answer to these questions. We have to presume some things and apply them universally. For instance, I have to presume that because I think and reason, other human beings also think and reason and that this is universal.
Yeah. I know. It can also be persuasively argued that there’s no way in hell, all human beings think and reason. Lots of evidence for both presumptions, but I can’t truly KNOW for sure. I don’t hear your thoughts. I don’t feel your feelings. All I can experience and know of you and the world is what I can observe.
I can’t know for certain that the world existed before I did or that it will continue after me based on my observations, because I’m limited to my five senses, my intellect and my ability to reason.
On the other hand, I can see that some things are true. Mathematics and science provide many principles, formulas and ideas that can be proven and repeated. I can see that there are universal (or nearly universal) experiences of the same objects or events. Rocks are hard. Knives are (or should be) sharp. Fire is hot. Some of reality would seem to be objective. Some of it would seem to be subjective to the individual’s perception. Color is one of these subjective things. None of us see colors quite like each other. If you take a color half way between blue and green on the color spectrum, it’s very possible you might say it’s more blue and I might say it’s more green.
That brings me to the main point of today’s post. What is real?
By extension, what is true?
These are important questions. Every culture revolves around shared answers to these questions. Every single one.
What is real implies that there are incontrovertible facts and existences.
What is true implies there is right and wrong. What is right is true and what is wrong is false.
As a culture we are in an upheaval and turning upside down the answers to these questions. Don’t believe me? How many genders are there? Most likely your answer will betray your age and/or your political and religious leanings. I could bring up many other examples, but they’re not the point. Neither is the gender question. They just illustrate that what is real and true can be treated as a subjective reality.
We’ve seen this more and more. It’s inherent in the ideas that people should live their truth. Or the idea that my truth is not the same as your truth. That you can’t legislate morality.
That last statement cracks me up every time I hear it. It’s one of the most stupid things I’ve ever heard. OF COURSE YOU CAN LEGISLATE MORALITY!!! That’s what legal codes do!!! Just because a religious text says something that a law also says doesn’t mean you’re pushing your morals on someone. Thou shalt not kill. That’s God’s law. So we can’t put that in man’s law because we want to separate church and state for some reason.
What happens when a culture can no longer agree on what is real and true?
It collapses from within. Sometimes it falls to external forces, but that’s often because it’s been weakened by the internal strife. Don’t misunderstand here. I’m not saying that normally everyone agrees on everything in a strong, cohesive society. Or that the American culture is doomed to collapse, though I’m sure many will applaud that even from within. At least until they realize they’re about to be put up against a wall and shot. That’s usually what happens when a culture collapses into violence. The violence isn’t inevitable, just very likely.
All because we can’t agree on what is real and true anymore. We see it in our politics and social discourse. Our “opponents” are no longer friendly or gentlemanly. They’re evil and must be destroyed, all because they don’t adhere to my truth.
It’s hypocritical bullshit. Those most likely to adhere to the idea that no one can define morality and truth for someone else seem to be the most likely to want to destroy the “other” because they disagree. Not hatred. Disagreement is not hate. Not liking one position or even aspects of one position shouldn’t lead to destruction by frothing at the mouth idiots.
Note I use no political labels, because a liberal/democrat will read that and agree. A conservative/Republican will also read that and agree. Both will be smug and self-righteous in their condemnation of the other side. This is the problem. We have met the enemy and they are us.
We didn’t get here overnight. Social and political disagreements aren’t the cause of the lack of agreement on what’s true and real. And the reverse isn’t true. Both seem to go hand in hand. Each round of political disagreement pushes back the limits of what we agree on, because we can’t cooperate with the devil. This heightens the social and political disagreements, and so on. It’s a death spiral.
In past cultures, this may have taken much longer and been less understood, but thanks to social media and the internet we can watch the whole thing live and in real-time because we’re all live-streaming the latest conflict to prove our point. Societal collapse won’t be complete unless there’s a truly calamitous event like a natural disaster or economic collapse of truly monumental proportions. At least that’s my opinion.
Society may well transform drastically, anyway. It does all the time. It’s generally within a basic framework, though. Now it seems the framework was the first thing to be jettisoned. We need to find a way to restore that framework.
We need to find a way to agree on what’s real and what’s true. Even if it’s only something small. Have to start somewhere.
