When did the truth become a bad thing?

[celtic_crippler]

What does it say about a people who expect apologies for honesty; who find the truth offensive?

 

[Tez3]

What does it say about a people who expect apologies for honesty; who find the truth offensive?

Perhaps though they don't see it as truth? To the National Front here the truth to them is that Hitler is a hero, my truth is that he's not.

I think you may be in for a long discussion on exactly what is truth?

 

[girlbug2]

I would think it says that these people are in some sort of denial or fear. In the case of government, suppression of opposition is a hallmark of fascists.

 

[celtic_crippler]

"Truth" is to a degree relative and subject to change over time.

I'm speaking to widely accepted facts. Perhaps later in thread I will present the actual event that prompted me to ask the question.

It seems to me, upon reflection, that Westerners have become so superficial that what is "real" and "true" are things simply not to be cherished or respected.

 

[Big Don]

What does it say about a people who expect apologies for honesty; who find the truth offensive?

It doesn't say anything good. Political Correctness is now, for some, more important than truth.
I hear "That isn't nice" a dozen times a day, each time I reply, "No, but, honest isn't always pleasant."

 

[celtic_crippler]

"No, but, honest isn't always pleasant."

No it's not, but if you choose to ignore the truth then how can one address an issue and improve upon it?

Being PC is harmful and counter productive to improvement.

Take an alcoholic for instance. If they never recognize their problem and admit to it, then they can not feasiblely take any steps to correcting it now can they?

 

[Ken Morgan]

All the worlds religions have all the spiritial and scientific answers you'll ever want. God exists, Jesus was his son, the earth was created 10, 000 years ago...etc, etc....

To millions this is the truth, these are facts as they see it.

To those of us who really know the truth/facts, its all superstious nonsense.

CC what facts specifically are you addressing?

Depending on the "facts", depending on the situation, you lie about them or ignore them, because they are not worth arguing about.

 

[celtic_crippler]

All the worlds religions have all the spiritial and scientific answers you'll ever want. God exists, Jesus was his son, the earth was created 10, 000 years ago...etc, etc....

To millions this is the truth, these are facts as they see it.

To those of us who really know the truth/facts, its all superstious nonsense.

CC what facts specifically are you addressing?

Depending on the "facts", depending on the situation, you lie about them or ignore them, because they are not worth arguing about.

I don't really want to cite the particular instance that prompted this at this point because I want to see unbiased replies and discussion on the topic.

I will say, interestingly enough, that the instance had nothing to do with religion.

I do think that Westerner's fascination with "appearences" seems to have contributed to the "death of truth."

Image seems to be of paramount importance any more; many blame MTV for the shallowness of this current trait. For example: Christopher Cross was the most popular pop artist at the time when MTV went to air. Once people saw his videos his popularity began to diminish and eventually nobody knew who the heck this guy even was.

It seems to me that "appearences" and "Political Correctness" have become more important that the "truth" in Western society.

 

[Jenny_in_Chico]

Crip, every person alive is walking around in a universe of their own creation. Everything they believe to be true is filtered through their own unique set of experiences and their own personal perspective. Therefore, it isn't as useful to discuss the abstract concept of "truth" as it is to discuss particular items that can be demonstrated to be "facts". And unless you are talking the hard sciences, even facts are open to interpretation.

 

[Carol]

No it's not, but if you choose to ignore the truth then how can one address an issue and improve upon it?

Being PC is harmful and counter productive to improvement.

Take an alcoholic for instance. If they never recognize their problem and admit to it, then they can not feasiblely take any steps to correcting it now can they?

Interesting topic!

A colleague of mine and I were just talking about something very similar.

In a work environment, person A can tell Person B that something can't be done, and do so in a professional manner. But what if Person A uttered profanity when turning down person B? Depending on how it was done, it could be barely noticeable, or it could be construed as a threat. "No, we bleeping can't do this and I'm going to bleep you if you ask again" is not acceptable dialogue in most professional environments, even if it is the truth.

If my doc says something like "You are over weight and your blood pressure is too high," usually a comment like that is dovetailed with a discussion about options the patient has to make a positive change. (Start exercising, see a nutritionist, prescription meds, etc). Likerewise if one person says to their significant other "You need to lose weight" but follows that on with "Maybe we can start going to the gym together" or "How about if we both join Weight Watchers?" then that shows that the person giving the critique is willing to help the subject in fixing the issue.

However, if someone says "You're fat" or "You're a lazy slob", the purpose is likely personal insult, and not constructive criticism. That's generally not something that a person would say if they are offering to help the subject fix the issue.

Intent matters (even if it is perceived). In general I think using good manners and/or professionalism can go along way to avoiding misunderstandings.

 

[punisher73]

I agree.

Working in LE, I don't know how many times that because I have to tell someone that they can't do something that "I'm rude" and wrong for telling them. Last example that comes to mind, I see someone pull up at a school in a marked fire lane (in fact, he parked RIGHT in front of the sign that said no parking) he exits his vehilce smoking a cigarette (which in Michigan is also a no-no during school hours). Before I can talk to him, he throws said cigarette butt on the ground and starts to walk away. I politely tell him that he is parked illegally and needs to park somewhere else. I also let him know that since he is on school property he can't smoke and I also asked him to pick up his trash. I asked him as politely as I could and did not raise my voice. I had other witnesses that were amazed that I was as polite as I was. Anyways, after I tell/ask him that he starts going off on why did I have to be so rude? Huh?

Apparantely when you ask people to do things that they don't want to do, it is now rude and people should be able to go about their business unobstructed.

I won't get into "facts" that support ALOT of things, but aren't PC to talk about without getting labeled.

 

[Ken Morgan]

I agree.

Working in LE, I don't know how many times that because I have to tell someone that they can't do something that "I'm rude" and wrong for telling them. Last example that comes to mind, I see someone pull up at a school in a marked fire lane (in fact, he parked RIGHT in front of the sign that said no parking) he exits his vehilce smoking a cigarette (which in Michigan is also a no-no during school hours). Before I can talk to him, he throws said cigarette butt on the ground and starts to walk away. I politely tell him that he is parked illegally and needs to park somewhere else. I also let him know that since he is on school property he can't smoke and I also asked him to pick up his trash. I asked him as politely as I could and did not raise my voice. I had other witnesses that were amazed that I was as polite as I was. Anyways, after I tell/ask him that he starts going off on why did I have to be so rude? Huh?

Apparantely when you ask people to do things that they don't want to do, it is now rude and people should be able to go about their business unobstructed.

I won't get into "facts" that support ALOT of things, but aren't PC to talk about without getting labeled.

Some people simply don't like it when you point out to them their "wrong" behaviour. Just the same as pointing out when someone is being rude. Even when you try and be extra polite to let them save face, they take it as offensive.

It's like no one wants to admit when they're wrong, when they made an error in judgement.

A little humility in the human race would go a long way to make the world a better place.

 

[celtic_crippler]

Here's what prompted my question and my reply to what I think about it.

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=83764

Punisher, your post falls right in line to a degree.

People are quick to become defensive. It seems the majority have become so hypersensitive that it doesn't matter what your demeanor is or how you say something. It's like we've become a nation of emotionally retarded, immature a-holes.

 

[chaos1551]

When approaching a shared reality with someone else, truth is very subjective. Even facts can be interpreted differently.

There is, however, an underlying truth in humanity. It resides in our thoughts. Miyamoto Mushashi wrote of it: do not think dishonestly.

When we lie to ourselves, there will never be a shared reality and any form of truth is lost.

To interpret facts differently and arrive at different conclusions is a form of painful but necessary growth. To be liberal or conservative is to see the world from a different point of view. But when we start lying to ourselves about what we think or thought, suddenly it's never our fault and our behavior is entitled and the other guy is always wrong. Most people don't realize how important Musashi's advice is. Musashi didn't write to think honestly, he wrote:

Do not think dishonestly.

If we all truly did so, our lifes' experiences would create a much better filter to perceive events through.

 

[CoryKS]

"The map is not the terrain." Everybody walks around with an idea in their head of what is truth and what is not. Some are closer in some situations but may be wildly errant in others. IMHO, one's happiness will generally be in proportion to how closely their map resembles the terrain, even when it comes to unpleasant truths. Being confronted with opposing facts can be frustrating and painful. Some may respond with embracing the new data, others may respond with "La La La Can't hear you, I demand an apology."

 

[Ken Morgan]

I don’t think many purposely go out to deceive themselves in their thoughts. Everyone’s frame of reference however is different; as we have all has different upbringings, educations, relationships etc, etc.

Conservative and Liberal are also very, very relevant terms, and I don’t think it’s a good idea to pigeonhole yourself from any such perspective.

I consider myself a “Conservative”, but I know I share many similar beliefs with many who consider themselves to be “Liberals”. In fact I know many liberals who are more conservative then I. Likewise some conservatives and liberals scare the hell out of me!!

Instead of “not thinking dishonestly” as Mushashi suggests, perhaps, “acting honestly with the best of intentions” may be the best route to take? You’re still going to be wrong many times, you’re still going to piss people off, but at least you “acted” with honest intent.

 

[celtic_crippler]

I don't know...

I think many's common state is denial any more. The West has become so superficial nobody wants to admit that they're not what they think they are or accept something as true if it presents a danger to their fragile ego.

Having different perspectives is one thing, denying something that is known to be true is different.

From my perspective fried chicken is delicious. You may hate it. What's true in that context is based on perspective but only to a degree. It's true that I like fried chicken. It's true that you don't. What's not true is that fried chicken is delicious because that is subject to individual perspective and taste. Fried chicken is a food source; however, and regardless of whether you like it or not that is true. You can eat it and it will supply you with certain nutrients and calories needed to survive.

Let's now suppose you hated fried chicken so much that you started a propaganda campaign to make it illegal... attempting to convince everybody that fried chicken is evil! It clogs your arteries and causes heart diseise! You get medical studies and scientific proof backing your view. People shouldn't eat fried chicken! Would that be truth? To you, maybe... but not me, I love fried chicken and think it's deliciousness outweighs any health concerns if eaten in moderation. Even though you introduced new variables (health issues) it doesn't change the fact that fried chicken is still a food source. You may even succeed in getting it outlawed, but it's still a food source.

 

[CoryKS]

I think many's common state is denial any more. The West has become so superficial nobody wants to admit that they're not what they think they are or accept something as true if it presents a danger to their fragile ego.

Let me preface by saying that I agree with the majority of your post. Didn't want you to think I was disregarding the rest, just wondered what prompted you to phrase it this way. Is there some reason why you think this state is exclusive to, or predominantly found in, "The West"? Is it your belief that non-western cultures are less susceptible to this, and what do you base that upon? Sorry, it's a pet peeve of mine when people attribute to the West traits that I would consider universal human failings. I can think of at least one non-Western culture that is so deeply in denial about its stature in this world that it readily responds with murder when its worldview is challenged.

 

[Steve]

There are truths and there are facts. Truths can be facts, but as often as not are simply one person's opinion. So, if your "truth" isn't a fact, but is instead your opinion, it stands to reason that some people will disagree and believe that it's a bad thing. Others will agree and denounce any disagreement as political correctness.

Taking this a bit further, even where facts are involved, there is rude and there is polite. These are subjective, but you can convey facts without tact. Whether you are factual or not has nothing to do with whether you are a dick or not. You can be both... or neither.

Finally, there is appropriate and inappropriate. In a professional environment, swearing at a coworker is inappropriate. Being professional has nothing to do with political correctness nor with being factual or truthful.

 

[Tez3]

Ah the West! Is it a truth then that all the West is infected with the malaise spoken about here? I think not so it would probably be more useful to speak about one's own country only rather than others, in the interests of truth of course.