================
“I had,” he said, “come to an entirely erroneous conclusion, my dear Watson, how dangerous it always is to reason from insufficient data.”
–
Sherlock Holmes
<The Adventure of the Speckled Band>
================
“When we get better understanding or the facts or evidence don’t agree with the theory we must change the theory and change course.””
–
Sherlock Holmes
============
“… when you hear hoof beats behind you don’t expect a zebra.”
–
proverb
===================
So. “I believe” may be two of the most dreaded word you can hear in today’s world. Those two words may be this century’s version of throwing down a gauntlet or challenging someone to a duel.
“I believe” has been bastardized in today’s world to actually mean “I know” <but people have convinced themselves if they soften it with ‘I believe’ people will think they are more open to listening and true discussion>.
Facts matter. And they matter a shitload not only with truth but in the battle between I know and I believe. The problem is that while facts are facts — two facts can coexist in the pursuit of “I know.”
Shit.
The truth is that truth, the unequivocal kind, is most likely borne of let’s say 8 facts <I made that number up>, coexisting, which when arranged into a pattern make up an unequivocal truth. This means unequivocal truth, or let’s call it good solid “I know”, is made up of a puzzle of facts and not just one fact or even two.
The practice of Truth is actually a profession of facts.
Using legalese for binding of contracts “by means of facts, truths are created and beliefs come into existence.” Yet, in spite of all good intentions, the meanings of individual facts are not always clear and unequivocal. They may be capable of being understood in more ways than one, they may be doubtful or uncertain, and they may lend themselves to various interpretations by different individuals.
Following that thought, this means, when differences in understanding are not resolvable, divides in “beliefs” occur and dysfunction, in terms of lack of progress, occurs.
Once again, in legal terms, this is called “ambiguity.”
Paradoxically enough, the word ambiguity itself has more than one interpretation. The general meaning has to do with how things are said, the words that are used, by someone and how those words are understood. Ambiguity occurs where the two are not in alignment. The lack of alignment actually springs back upon the facts themselves in a vicious way — the fact itself comes into doubt.
Sigh.
But facts are facts. The problem isn’t about the fact, but rather most truths are more complex than equating it with one fact. Unequivocal truth is grounded in … well … 8 facts <once again, I picked 8 out of the air but you get the point>. This problem gets compounded by how people elect to actually use facts.
Using my 8 let me tell you what I mean. The expert, the most knowledgeable, will stack up the 8 facts from top to bottom in order of priority, but all relevant to making and truth unequivocal.
Then we, the non-experts, get in the game.
Some of us use the highest priority fact, say #1, and that is all.
Some grab the facts we want, in the order we want, and create the truth we want.
Some may actually use the 8, but decided to prioritize them in a different order <which may net out to a slightly different ‘truth’ conclusion than the expert who lined them up properly>.
All are using facts. Most are using them improperly or in an incomplete way. And, inevitably, 90%+ end up with an “I believe” and not an “I know” stand.
I know. I know. We all wish truth could be easier and, in fact, many people flippantly suggest truth is simple <or simpler than we make it out to be>. Here is what I know about that. Using the thought I used upfront in this piece “… when you hear hoof beats behind you don’t expect a zebra.”
Well. An expert, maybe a horse trainer, could hear the hoof beats and tell you with 95% confidence the breed, the weight and the type of horse coming up behind you. The dreamer will suggest it could be a unicorn. The pragmatic will narrow it down to a horse, zebra, antelope or some 4 hoofed animal.
Truth is less than simple and more in need of facts than we like to admit.
Yes.
The trouble with unequivocal truth is that it usually takes ‘one more step than you think’ to get there. Unfortunately, the truth about this is most of us don’t make it there.
We stop short.
And I tend to believe most of us know we are stopping short. We like the facts that we have but we, at the same time, know there are most likely some more out there that could be useful. We have 3 or 4 and decide the remaining 4 or 5 are just not that necessary. I guess we bank on the fact, if we stop short, we have at least grabbed the top 3 or 4 most important facts in an unequivocal truth. Good enough or enough to make it ‘sensible.’
Yikes. Dangerous thought.
It’s dangerous in believing we have the most important ones of the ones we decided is enough, but possibly even more dangerous is that we confuse an unequivocal truth for a simple “I believe” thought.
It is dangerous because “I believes” tend to reside in the negative space. Huh? If you only snag 4 of the 8 necessary facts the debate can never be resolved as the back & forth ends up in the blank spaces around the discussion. Truth is constructed more often by what was not found than what was found <look at what I didn’t point out versus what I did point out> – that is negative space truth.
Uhm. That is not unequivocal truth.
In fact … it poisons the unequivocal truths in a misdirection of specious comparisons.
I would suggest that more of us should pay attention to negative space.
Why? Negative space is usually indicative that a fact is missing. 99% of negative space can be filled with a fact <if only we looked hard enough for it>.
All that said. Truth is the axis munid … the dead center of the earth.
=============
“the person who pretends to not see the truth is committing something much worse than a mortal sin, which can only ruin one’s soul – but instead committing us all to lifetimes of pain. The truth is not just something we bring to light to amuse ourselves; the truth is the axis munid, the dead center of the earth.
When it’s out of place nothing is right; everyone is in the wrong place; no light can penetrate. Happiness evades us and we spread pain and misery wherever we go.
Each person, above all others, has an obligation to recognize the truth and stand by it.”
Jacque Silette
================
I believe, no, I know the world would be a better place if more of us took that thought seriously. Because if we did than maybe we wouldn’t stop short of the unequivocal truth destination. Maybe we wouldn’t settle for an “I believe” thought and confuse it with a real “I know” thought. And maybe if we did there would be less discussion of alternative facts and more discussion about unequivocal truths on which we could center ourselves on.
“I had,” he said, “come to an entirely erroneous conclusion, my dear Watson, how dangerous it always is to reason from insufficient data.”
Geez. If Sherlock Holmes says that sure as shit more of us should be saying it <and I don’t think we are>.
Unequivocal truth exists.
They exist as surely as Santa Claus <yes Virginia, there is a Santa Claus >.
We just have to want to get there and not be satisfied by stopping short and feeling good about the facts we gathered … short of the ones we need to reach unequivocal. I don’t know that 8 facts create an unequivocal truth is the right formula, but I sure as shit believe it is on the right path to getting there.