Truth is a term we use in various ways. I want to write about the kind of truth that reveals how things work and helps predict the future. The ability to predict the future better than other living creatures has made us rule the World (and destroy it one day).
Truth also means the collection of the facts of the past, but that doesn’t need calculation or intelligence. We can store such information in an inorganic way, e.g., in a book or a photograph.
Niels Bohr once said:
Two sorts of truth: profound truths recognized by the fact that the opposite is also a profound truth, in contrast to trivialities where opposites are obviously absurd.
In this writing, I will talk about not two but three kinds:
- Scientific (or “trivial” in Bohr’s words)
- Ordinary or individual
- Profound or social
Scientific truth
Let’s start with the easiest. We can predict the future state of the physical world by applying the laws of nature to the current scenario. As the physical world is moved only by the forces of nature and doesn’t have free will, the outcome should be the same, provided the initial circumstances are the same. This ensures one key requirement of the scientific truth: reproducibility.
Furthermore, science has tools to measure, so the initial state and the outcome of an experiment can be precisely measured, meaning these experiments are verifiable – another critical requirement for scientific statements.
Scientific theories must be based on existing scientific knowledge and supported by logical and mathematical reasoning. This makes scientific theories verifiable and debatable, providing solid ground for further scientific truths.
Scientific truths are not carved into stone. They are not the sum of the current scientific knowledge but rather a trust that even though today’s knowledge is incomplete (or possibly wrong in some areas), we can finally explain everything by logic and mathematics. Even uncertainty can be the subject of science as long as it remains random.
The opposite of a scientific truth must be false (or “absurd,” as Bohr said). Otherwise, the logic behind it is flawed, and therefore, it fails to meet the criteria of scientific truths.
Ordinary truth
or individual truth
The world, however, is not only made up of inorganic material. Our brains have evolved to survive in environments with living creatures beyond the natural elements. Living creatures are not passively reacting to the forces of nature. They learn, adapt, and form strategies. If you had to predict the future of a scene with living creatures involved, you had to know all their past experiences and behavioral patterns. In a competitive world, it’s improbable that one individual or a complete species can leap forward as much as they can emulate all their adversaries’ thinking.
That’s why we make guesswork based on our past experiences. We simplify things, follow our instincts (or the herd), or react randomly (try unknown routes). That’s far from the scientific method. It is neither reproducible nor verifiable, but it is much more efficient when our lives depend on how fast we react.
Psychology calls it “availability heuristics” (or even prejudice), but no matter how bad it sounds, this is how our brains work 99% of the time.
Everybody has a past, a set of experiences, rules of thumb, and strategies. This is our own “individual” truth. Our perspectives are often seen as correct within our minds. You can’t imagine a brain that can compensate for its falseness. Spending the overhead computational power on storing more facts or using more potent logic is always better.
Moreover, a worldview is a construct; it takes a lot of effort to build it up or even change a brick. Instead of admitting we aren’t right, we used to bend reality to match our worldview. We cherry-pick facts and generously ignore the conflicting ones.
Individual or ordinary truth, therefore, is not universal. Each of us has a different truth. It helps us stay alive, albeit sometimes at the expense of other living beings.
The opposite of an ordinary truth is not falseness – it might be the truth for another individual.
Profound truth
or social truth
Beyond individual truths, communities develop shared beliefs and values that guide their behavior. These collective truths, often embodied in religions, philosophies, or cultural norms, shape our understanding of the world and influence our actions. While they may not adhere to the rigorous standards of scientific truth, they play a crucial role in shaping human societies.
In religion, this knowledge is called “teaching” or “commandments“, in sociology “behavioral norms“, or “laws“.
These social truths can also be destructive, but let’s now talk about the socially beneficial truths. With the help of these strategies, we can strengthen our chances of survival as a group or as a species. Once we agree on community rules, we don’t have to be prepared for hostile reactions; we can set up shared goals and live with much less stress. This creates a mutual benefit for all the participants and a competitive edge over the others. All religions became successful because they provided their followers with certainty and reassurance and excommunicated those who broke the rules. The same goes for the legal systems in recent history.
Although religions do not follow strict rules like science, they are much better at reaching their goal of being understood and accepted by parables or tales, which is how our brains store information.
Predicting the future is not simply calculating it from the current scenario in a passive way – the science is capable of doing – but also forming it actively. That’s what common rules do, be it a religion, humanism, or the law.
“Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself” is neither false nor true; it only becomes reality if all participants follow these rules.
Finally, is there an opposite of a profound truth? No. Another profound truth might lead to another future, but that’s not false either. No single truth exists; there are infinite truths. We can not simply choose one passively but also invent one.
So what’s the truth, then?
I believe there’s no controversy about the scientific truths are true. We can say that science’s predictions are 99.99% exact. Even though our understanding of the physical world is constantly evolving, the methodology, the infrastructure, and the number of brains involved guarantee that we can trust the statements of science.
Our individual set of truths falls into three categories: those that are false, those that are true – these two can be sorted out with scientific methodology – and all the rest, which can influence the future. Their success rate depends on how much we believe them and how much we can sell to others. This is kind of an evolution of individual truths. Today, our human needs are almost fully satisfied by civilization, so this race of individual truths has become nearly pointless. It doesn’t matter how smart or how caring you are once everybody’s survival and living standards are guaranteed by modern societies. Modern societies this way have unleashed individualism involuntarily. (Just like it happened with the genetic evolution.)
Community truth is also at a turning point today. Our traditional commandments came from the era of city-states, in which making distinctions between members and outsiders strengthened the community. It was a necessity at that time. Today, we live in mixed societies – even those who live in single-nation countries – and the old teachings sometimes work against us. We need a common truth for humanity, as we face threats that we can solve only together. Our thousand-year-old religions won’t help us out of the DS (: dire situation) we’re currently in, I’m afraid.