What is the truth? Truth is the model/explanation or paradigm that best fits the observations we see around us. This description makes it obvious that there is no absolute truth but different perspectives. Even if there was an absolute truth, we will never be able to separate it from our own unique perspective. Realization of this fact is actually empowering and liberating. It makes us open to advancement, to seek truth at higher and higher levels, while at the same time bestowing upon us the tolerance to sympathize with different perspectives with an open mind.
The scientific method is a set of techniques we have used over the ages to advance our knowledge of the universe around us, using empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. The effectiveness of the scientific method can be seen in the technological advances all around us. The “truth” as per the scientific method is also subject to the same principles set out above. Newton’s laws for example, are still valid and very useful for a certain scope. Beyond that scope, laws defined by Einstein will be a better fit. So the truth is also dependent on the scope of what we’re looking at. This variability or the ability of the truth to evolve over time is no reason to reject the scientific method or the “established truth” within the relevant scope of measurement. In fact, we have no alternative, outside of blind faith or risky speculation.
This wonderful TED talk by Naomi Oreskes talks about why we should trust scientists with historical examples of both successes and failures. After all, for many people, there is no difference between believing a scientist who says that evolution is real, vs. an influential figure in their life who says that a flying spaghetti monster created the universe (pun intended) - both involve a leap of faith since they cannot evaluate the truth of either of these by themselves. Paradoxically, constructive mistrust by a community of experts (scientists) in the subject area that needs to be overcome before any scientific knowledge becomes accepted is one of the best reasons why scientific knowledge stands on a better vantage point in relation to the truth. Belief strengthened by doubt and questioning and therefore open to advancement and refinement is stronger and stable compared to that formed by blind faith.
Even though all of the above may seem obvious, the current reality is quite depressing. A recent poll found that 1/3rd of Americans reject the theory of evolution! The current theory of evolution certainly does not have ALL the answers, and there are gaps that are yet to be explained which will certainly see our understanding of the details evolve over time. However, these are not valid reasons to reject the theory of evolution altogether. Such an outcome in the most advanced country in the world with free access to knowledge and education paints a rather grim picture for the rest of the planet, especially places where much more fundamental forms of religion holds sway. It also shows the often irreconcilable clashes between science and institutionalised forms of religion that can stall the progress of human civilisation.
It's time we look at what's wrong with our education system that makes people vulnerable to manipulation, whether by extremist ideologies or unscrupulous politicians. Recent events where even people educated and brought up in the West were convinced to fight alongside terrorist organisations is a case in point. Imagine the damage if such indoctrination happens from a young age without access to alternative forms of thinking? The most fundamental requirement of education should be to empower human beings with the ability to evaluate the truth on their own based on evidence. This capability should be provided to every human being through a liberating form of education.
The scientific method is a set of techniques we have used over the ages to advance our knowledge of the universe around us, using empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. The effectiveness of the scientific method can be seen in the technological advances all around us. The “truth” as per the scientific method is also subject to the same principles set out above. Newton’s laws for example, are still valid and very useful for a certain scope. Beyond that scope, laws defined by Einstein will be a better fit. So the truth is also dependent on the scope of what we’re looking at. This variability or the ability of the truth to evolve over time is no reason to reject the scientific method or the “established truth” within the relevant scope of measurement. In fact, we have no alternative, outside of blind faith or risky speculation.
This wonderful TED talk by Naomi Oreskes talks about why we should trust scientists with historical examples of both successes and failures. After all, for many people, there is no difference between believing a scientist who says that evolution is real, vs. an influential figure in their life who says that a flying spaghetti monster created the universe (pun intended) - both involve a leap of faith since they cannot evaluate the truth of either of these by themselves. Paradoxically, constructive mistrust by a community of experts (scientists) in the subject area that needs to be overcome before any scientific knowledge becomes accepted is one of the best reasons why scientific knowledge stands on a better vantage point in relation to the truth. Belief strengthened by doubt and questioning and therefore open to advancement and refinement is stronger and stable compared to that formed by blind faith.
Even though all of the above may seem obvious, the current reality is quite depressing. A recent poll found that 1/3rd of Americans reject the theory of evolution! The current theory of evolution certainly does not have ALL the answers, and there are gaps that are yet to be explained which will certainly see our understanding of the details evolve over time. However, these are not valid reasons to reject the theory of evolution altogether. Such an outcome in the most advanced country in the world with free access to knowledge and education paints a rather grim picture for the rest of the planet, especially places where much more fundamental forms of religion holds sway. It also shows the often irreconcilable clashes between science and institutionalised forms of religion that can stall the progress of human civilisation.
It's time we look at what's wrong with our education system that makes people vulnerable to manipulation, whether by extremist ideologies or unscrupulous politicians. Recent events where even people educated and brought up in the West were convinced to fight alongside terrorist organisations is a case in point. Imagine the damage if such indoctrination happens from a young age without access to alternative forms of thinking? The most fundamental requirement of education should be to empower human beings with the ability to evaluate the truth on their own based on evidence. This capability should be provided to every human being through a liberating form of education.
In my humble opinion.... truth is the agreement between heart and mind. Some have this amazing ability to cover up any disagreements between them and usually go ahead with the picture that mind creates. Heart usually never lies, but the mind... depending on the circumstances... might :).
ReplyDeleteNo matter how much you try to reason, heart plays a major role in all our decision making and beliefs. It's good to be self-aware of that fact and channel it effectively to get the right balance. Having said that, suicide bombers probably feel it "in their hearts" that what they do is right and just - but it is also likely that someone got to their mind as well with some twisted logic of how such an act is going to help "in the grand scheme of things". Heart and mind can influence each other in ways that can be difficult to trace even for ourselves. This is why we need to have a predictable fall back option that allows us to question these believes and evolve with time.
ReplyDelete