In the last article, I talked about the cultural lie that we as humans can actually be completely neutral with regard to real-life topics that impact each of us and our everyday lives (morality/ethics, worldview, beliefs/values). The only exception I can think of to this would be to have complete ignorance about a topic.
The second cultural lie – which I believe ties in well with the myth of neutrality – that I’d like to bring forth is this idea that your truth is your truth, and my truth is my truth.”
Before you prepare your rebuttal to my claim, bear with me as I explain more clearly.
What I AM NOT saying here is that we can’t each have our own truth in terms of what we subjectively experience…obviously we can!
But…I’d argue that this use of the word “truth” could easily be replaced with the word “perspective” or “experience” and actually dilutes the other, traditionally more important definition of the word “truth” which is “the quality of being true” or “the real facts about a situation, event, or person.”
What I AM saying here is that we can’t each have our own truth in an objective sense because that would dilute the point of even using the word “truth.”
Years ago, I had a conversation with a very intelligent, older mental health professional colleague at work. This colleague avidly held to this notion of “your truth is your truth, and my truth is my truth.”
She commented, “I believe two things can be true at the same time.”
So, I brought up a hypothetical scenario in which a person was running out into the street towards an oncoming bus saying “I want to run into the street and I will not get hit by a bus” while clearly seeing he or she is about to run into the bus.
I shared how another person witnessing the scene observes that a bus is going to intersect the path of the person and says “There is a bus there and you will get hit by the bus.”
In one sense, both perspectives are valid and may be subjectively believed, yet I asked the following:
Are both thoughts/beliefs represented objectively true?
Or is one thought or belief more objectively true than another?
And even more importantly – when thinking about a real-life scenario – would one thought or believe serve the running person better than another? (assuming this isn’t someone with a death wish!)
Now, I think most intelligent, thinking people would recognize one perspective more accurately presents reality or objective truth than the other.
Curiously, my very intelligent colleague proceeded to say, “I believe two things can be true at the same time.”
Did my colleague miss the part in the basic logic course on “the law of non-contradiction”?
The law of non-contradiction is quite simple and means what it sounds like. In other words, 2+2=4 and 2+2=5 can’t both be true at the same time.
Personally, I don’t think that’s it at all.
I think there’s a form of cultural programming that we’re all susceptible to that can influence how we think and what we believe.
But while talking in hypotheticals and theory is in and of itself harmless, the more relevant question for you and I to ask is:
what would actually happen if a society, culture, or world embraced this idea of relativism / subjectivism? (embodied in this notion of “your truth is your truth and my truth is my truth”)
Tragically, we have clear modern-day examples of this type of thinking:
“A woman can be a man if she wants to, and a man can be a woman if he wants to.”
“Yes, I believe a man can get pregnant.”
“Any individual can label themselves a ‘woman’ because being a ‘woman’ is a sociocultural phenomenon.”
“Gender and sex are ‘assigned’ (vs. discovered) at birth by a doctor.”
“I think a human’s life becomes valuable when he or she is born; before that, it’s a fetus not a baby.”
What’s even scarier is how these relativistic and subjectivistic beliefs – birthed out of this cultural lie that “your truth is your truth, and my truth can be my truth” – actually affect us humans and our lives on a day-to-day basis.
What’s interesting to me is that many proponents of this type of thinking often move out of their subjective frame when confronted about this type of thinking and will often respond in a way that implies they believe your way of thinking is objectively wrong (ironic, eh?). It’s like a form of gas-lighting!
These scenarios leave me scratching my head wondering “what happened to your truth is your truth and my truth is my truth?”
In conclusion…
Have you found yourself influenced by this type of “your truth can be your truth while my truth can be my truth” type of thinking?”
If so, what do YOU think are the implications you see of holding on to these types of beliefs and living this way?
Again, this series is to stimulate and provoke thinking not necessarily to tell you what to think.
Let’s thrive in truth!
