chapter 4 (original) (raw)
We do not boast that we possess absolute truth; on the contrary, we believe that social truth is not a fixed quality, good for all times, universally applicable or determinable in advance…Our solutions always leave the door open to different and, one hopes better solutions. (Malatesta 1965(Malatesta [1921: 269)
TRUTH IS ONE, THE WISE CALL IT VARIOUSLY, PART I
This article is Part I of a compilation of Swami Vivekananda’s commentaries on the mantra from the Rig Veda: Ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti: Truth is one; the wise call it variously. Vivekananda interprets this ancient mantra as a means to understand how, because of our innate dualistic vision, we so regularly fail to interpret constructively the relationship between facts/events and data/experiences, and how our various “incompatible” interpretations have perennially led to misunderstanding, hatred, and bloodshed. The motive of Swami Vivekananda is to open out the discussion and by means of applying the intent of the mantra to resolve conflict and lay a foundation for ongoing understanding and building positively in all realms of human endeavor. This is the first in my overview of fifteen Upanishadic mantras, five of which are classical mahavakyas and the other ten “auxiliaries” to them. This mantra is, in my view, a key to understanding the often-indirect meaning of the other mahavakyas themselves, all of which call for the capacity to abandon dualistic dogmas and to open out more and more to the experience of the deepest levels of human consciousness from one level to another. Swami Vivekananda quoted this mantra on many occasions and in considerable depth. The result is a quite large text, which I have decided to present in two parts. The present, first text focuses on the role the human mind habitually plays in this ancient, apparently never-ending drama. In Part II Vivekananda goes into historical contexts of how the insight into the mantra developed in India especially and how this phenomenon contrasted with the views of cultures contemporary to it. These remarks set the stage for later cultural misunderstandings and conflicts, which conclude the second part of this work.
Truth and Social Science Theories: Starting from the End and there is no Panacea
Sociologists have again started meta-theoretical debates about their disciplines in terms of crisis, fundamental goals and purposes, cores and identities. The achievement of " objective knowledge " through this discipline was never beyond question. Hence, the articulation of " truth " through the scientific approaches applied in social science is also obscure to many extents. Of late, often both in academic and in public discussions we hear that truth is contingent on time, space and culture. This contingency of truth also has been developed in many recent academic discourses. However, the basic aim of this paper is to enter into the wider debate ofsocial sciences theories in understanding the " truth/objectivity. " Through this paper, I argue that the forms of truth characteristic of our present are wider than social scientists recognized, their relations to objectivity more various, and their historicity more complex. The truth regime of advanced modernity is characterized by multiple, irreducible truth formulae that coexist and sometimes vie for dominance. Finally, this paper concludes that a new theory emerges from the end of another one and there is no panacea in achieving the truth/objectivity. Since, judging all alternatives rather than one is better as well as tenable to gain knowledge on truth/objectivity.Because trying many alternatives improve our self-evidence and self-evidence is comparatively better in judging the truth/objectivity.
“The Concept of Truth Regime,” Canadian Journal of Sociology 33 (2) (2008):367-389.
"Truth regime" is a much used but little theorized concept, with the Foucauldian literature presupposing that truth in modernity is uniformly scientific/ quasi-scientific and enhances power. I argue that the forms of truth characteristic of our present are wider than Foucault recognized, their relations to power more various, and their historicity more complex. The truth regime of advanced modernity is characterized by multiple, irreducible truth formulae that co-exist and sometimes vie for dominance. A truth formula stabilizes a network of elements: a relation between representation and presentation (words and things), truth and non-truth, and the place of the subject in discourse. Our contemporary truth regime comprises radically heterogeneous truthful knowledges--science, governance, religion/politics, and common culture--that have distinct histories and relations to power.
ENGEL TRUTH Enc phil social sciences 2013
Encyclopedia of philosophy of the social sciences, 2013
penultimate version of "Truth, philosophical theories of" , in Encyclopedia of philosophy of the social sciences, ed. B. Kaldis , Sage publications, 2013, 1020-24
The University of Yaounde 1, 2022
During times of universal propagation of fake news and falsehoods, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. Confrontations in politics lead to distrust, wilful manipulations of facts and struggles for power, and even turned into an excuse for exploitation and oppression. These dire situations in politics are its distorted presentations, which obscure the fact that the existence of politics is to facilitate universal well-being and promote the common good beyond cultural, linguistic, racial, tribal, religious and ideological differences. In 2016 the Oxford dictionary declared Post-truth as the word of the year while in 2017 the Trump administration promoted the word “Alternative Facts”, thus fanning into flames the already existing debates surrounding the nature of truth. Yet, we must not conclude that truth no longer matters in the gloomy, degenerating politics and social constructionism. A deepening and widening concern for the promotion and protection of truth on all fronts is now urgent. In fact, no other period in human history has been so linked to the quest for truth as the 21st Century. Any analysis of “Alternative Facts” would be incomplete without a reading of Hannah Arendt’s magnificent essay, “Truth and Politics” from 1967. Arendt, in this essay, examines carefully the relationship between truth and politics and makes a few observations that educate us that “Alternative Facts” is but an aspect of that greater challenge of how we reconcile truth and politics. Our whole enterprise is provoked by the overwhelming spread of fake news, falsehoods and the uncontrollable desire of politicians to anchor their entire political trajectory on lies telling to suit their whims and caprices. This outright disregard for truth, the common good, human rights all generate conflict. The cycle of violence that is recently perpetrated in various parts of Africa attest to this fact. We wish, in this work, to show that political power, if used properly, associated with morality and virtue, could bring forth rectification of society, thus facilitating universal well-being and happiness of the people, as the ideal cause of politics. To bring our objective to a logical conclusion, the Phenomenological-Hermeneutic approach is used to investigate on the question: how can political power be used properly in order to bring forth rectification of society and facilitate universal well-being of the people as the ideal cause of politics? We are going to follow the methodological structure of three parts each of which constitutes three chapters: the first part constitutes Arendt’s consideration of truth and politics which she concludes that they are two inseparable phenomenological realities of human existence; the second part logically follows with special attention on the notion of “Alternative Facts” as a modern warfare against truth in politics in the post-truth era; the third part recommends that a recommitment to truth as core ethical value in contemporary political discourse is a categorical imperative; an unconditional moral obligation. With all these, we realise Hannah Arendt is the philosopher of our times with far-reaching pertinence. Keywords: Truth, Alternative Facts, Post-truth, Politics, Post-truth Politics
Abandoning Truth is not a Solution. A Discussion with Richard Rorty
Diametros
Richard Rorty suggests that we should stop looking for something common to us all, for universal justifi cations and truth. Rorty argues that focusing on a single truth sooner or later serves those who claim that there is a proper, true model of living. In the end, they use violence and cause pain, as they are driven by the idea that everyone should accept their truth. In this article I shall argue that such reasoning is not justifi ed and whether we are universalists or constructivists, our actions may be the same and cause pain. At the same time, having the same beliefs will not stop us from acting differently. What matters is how we use a particular concept in accordance with our interests and not the concept itself. I shall also argue that dialog can help to prevent violence and that while Rorty is right, there are also a number of problems with that proposition.
TRUTH IS ONE, THE WISE CALL IT VARIOUSLY, PART 1.docx
This article is Part I of a compilation of Swami Vivekananda’s commentaries on the mantra from the Rig Veda: Ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti: Truth is one; the wise call it variously. Vivekananda interprets this ancient mantra as a means to understand how, because of our innate dualistic vision, we so regularly fail to interpret constructively the relationship between facts/events and data/experiences, and how our various “incompatible” interpretations have perennially led to misunderstanding, hatred, and bloodshed. The motive of Swami Vivekananda is to open out the discussion and by means of applying the intent of the mantra to resolve conflict and lay a foundation for ongoing understanding and building positively in all realms of human endeavor. This is the first in my overview of fifteen Upanishadic mantras, five of which are classical mahavakyas and the other ten “auxiliaries” to them. This mantra is, in my view, a key to understanding the often-indirect meaning of the other mahavakyas themselves, all of which call for the capacity to abandon dualistic dogmas and to open out more and more to the experience of the deepest levels of human consciousness from one level to another. Swami Vivekananda quoted this mantra on many occasions and in considerable depth. The result is a quite large text, which I have decided to present in two parts. The present, first text focuses on the role the human mind habitually plays in this ancient, apparently never-ending drama. In Part II Vivekananda goes into historical contexts of how the insight into the mantra developed in India especially and how this phenomenon contrasted with the views of cultures contemporary to it. These remarks set the stage for later cultural misunderstandings and conflicts, which conclude the second part of this work.
Literature summary of Truth, WZB Mitteilungen Heft 178, Dezember 2022
2023
1. Gunnar Folke Schuppert: Googled, told, felt …………………….…...............… 1 2. Jelena Cupać und Mitja Sienknecht: Little protection for democracy 2 3. Michael Zürn: Doubts, lies, false expertise ………………..…………................ 5 4. Im Interview Edgar Grande: „The world is out of joint“ …………….........… 7 5. Peter J. Katzenstein: Truth and uncertainty…………...………..…............…. 10 6. Wolfgang van den Daele: Science and "Post-Truth"“ …………............……12 7. Florian Irgmaier und Florian Eyert: Skeptical vision …...…...…..........…. 13 8. Katrin Schaar: Quality Factor Research Ethics …………………............…... 15 9. Steffen Huck: Fear, interests and morality ………….…………….................. 16 10. Kai Barron und Tilmam Fries: The main thing is to be coherent …..... 17 11. Dorothea Kübler: Rejection through overconfidence………..….........…… 19
Post-Truth Dönemi̇n Si̇yasal İleti̇şi̇me Yansimalari
DergiPark (Istanbul University), 2022
ÖZ Hakikat Ötesi, Hakikat Sonrası veya Gerçeğin/Hakikatin Önemsizleştirilmesi olarak Türkçeye çevrilen Post-Truth teriminin yeni olmamasına rağmen, konuyla ilgili araştırma sayısının 2016 yılından itibaren artmasıyla birlikte gelinen noktada, alan araştırmacılarının daha çok ilgisini çekmeye başlayan bir kavram olmuştur. Literatürde, bir yandan kavram özelinde toplumsal çalışmalar yapılırken ve Post-Truth çağında yaşadığımız savunulurken, diğer yandan karşıt görüşler de alan araştırmalarında yer almaktadır. Post-Truth kavramı, içinde yalanı barındıran bir kavramdır ve yalanların gerçekmiş gibi sunulduğu kompleks bir durumu açıklamaya çalışır, burada ilginç olan ise özellikle siyasilerin yalana başvurmasından ziyade halkın bu duruma, yalan olduğunu bilse bile hoşgörülü yaklaşmasıdır. Günümüzde halk bilgi kaynağı olarak kitle iletişim araçlarını kullanmakta, araştırmalarını bu mecrada yapmaktadır. Kolay anlaşılır, zahmetsiz, teknik terimlerden uzak, sürükleyici, heyecanlandırıcı ve fakat temelsiz, kaynaksız ve niteliksiz bilgi yığınları, forumlar, sosyal medya ortamları aracılığıyla kısa sürede binlerce kişiye ulaşmaktadır. Bundan dolayı bilginin kaynağı belirsizleşmekte, bilginin kontrolü akademiden çıkmakta, sunulanlar alıcılar tarafından yalan olup olmadığına dair şüphe duymadan hap gibi alınmasına neden olmaktadır. İşte bu ortamlarda da zemin Post-Truth için daha elverişli hâle gelmektedir ve bu durumun siyasetle ilişkilendirilmesi kaçınılmazdır. Bu çalışmada, sosyolojik açıdan etkisi henüz araştırılan Post-Truth döneminin özelliklerinin çokça yer bulduğu siyasi arenaya ve doğası gereği başat olarak siyasal iletişime yansımalarına ve etkisine dikkat çekilmek istenmiştir.
Towards a peaceful truth : An exploration of post-modern philosophical and anthropological thought.
Towards a peaceful truth : An exploration of post-modern philosophical and anthropological thought., 2021
Ailton Krenak, an indigenous philosopher from Brazil, explains that this "single-truth humanity" has justified a tremendous amount of violence and may be at the source of our worst enterprises (Krenak, 2020, p16). And when the world comes to an end, after the brief but destructive passage of humanity, "we will have proven that humanity is a lie" (Krenak, 2020, p17). This plea against the concept of humanity, coming from an indigenous man whose community lost most of its population over the past century at the hands of westerners, will come as a shock to most of us. Indeed, one may wonder what moral or ethics will trigger mobilization enacting their protection if not that universal humanitarian cause. After all, very few -if any- are those whose humanism does not turn into boasting once they do a good deed to help the peoples of the Amazon, and it does not shock any of us. To the contrary, we admire that commitment to elevating every human to a standard level and may frown upon those who do not try. This idea of commonness propelled by humanism is the only fuel to respect, and it seems hardly conceivable why an indigenous leader would hold this humanity principle to be the cause of such harm. So how can truth ever be bad? How can humanity ever be oppressive?
Social science, epistemology, and the problem of relativism: Reply to Meja and Stehr
Social Epistemology, 1988
This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.