A Thought Before the 2008 Presidential Election
Posted Nov 3, 08:41 am in human nature, politics, postmodernism
What is the link between the following ideas?
- The world is 5,000 years old
- George W. Bush and his minions planned and orchestrated 9/11
- People on welfare spend all their money on alcohol and drugs
- Barack Obama is a socialist and a Muslim (despite having a Christian pastor)
- Marijuana is a dangerous drug and usually leads to harder, even more dangerous drugs
Give up? All these things have no basis in fact. Yet, they are all beliefs that people rabidly cling to no matter what evidence comes up to contradict them.
Like the people who believe these things, some moral and political crusaders spend so much of their lives trying to reinforce and justify their pre-existing opinions that they can’t evaluate new information without experiencing profound cognitive dissonance; they then cling to their pre-existing opinions even tighter to ensure the security of their own identities. These people are called extremists, fundamentalists, jihadists, terrorists, racists, bigots, ideologues, and morons.
To these people, the world is not a complex place; it is a place of black and white, good and evil, right and wrong, “it is” or “it isn’t.” The real world is not this; it is a place of often unsettling gray and ambiguity. And to grapple with it in a meaningful way requires serious independent thought, self-reflection, and a willingness to admit that your thoughts might be inaccurate and plain wrong at times. Reality can conflict even with one’s most basic, gut-level knowledge of “truth.” This is deeply troubling to most people. But we all need to take steps to confront the fact that truth has a way of changing depending on what we know. Perhaps if we take the time to learn more, we can change. Alas, most people do not have the capacity to search for truth or the desire to change; they want to hold on to their old, limited conceptions of the world. And to force them on others.
I heard a reporter talking to a college-age boy about his choice for president. “McCain,” the boy remarked. “He doesn’t want to take from the rich to give to the poor.” This comment was made with the underlying assumption that doing this was wrong. He then went on to admit that he came from an affluent background and that played into his decision. It was a moment that caught me a little off guard, because the unstated subtext of his comment (that perhaps he himself was not even aware of) was that if he were someone else— perhaps a poor person— he might have made a different choice.
But then, if our conception of righteousness is so fluid, and subject to change based on our own current situation and how our opinions might personally benefit us, how then can our thoughts and opinions on issues have any value other than the demonstration of opportunistic self-interest? Should our opinions not reflect attitudes that we would hold regardless of their personal impact on us, or what our situation is?
Perhaps it would be useful to consider the words of Mahatma Gandhi, whose life continues to be an inspiration to me:
“In my life, my commitment is to truth, not consistency.”
“Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds…” -Emerson The brightest minds agree on one thing: We must constantly challenge our own beliefs and opinions. We must test them and test ourselves, because holding them up to the scrutinizing light of new facts is the only way to evolve and advance. Ignorance is a lightning fast sprinter, and only the marathon runner of truth has any hope of overtaking him. I have always liked Ghandi’s words on both truth and experimentation.
Permit me one more Emerson quote:
“No facts are to me sacred. None are profane. I simply experiment; an endless seeker with no past at my back.” (Circles)— stubborn belle · Nov 3, 12:38 pm · #