A philosophical reflection about "truth"

It's hard to believe, what with the Biblical Ten Commandments and all, but the concept of "truth" is under attack by people who want to ignore the meaning of truth.

So, for that reason, I found this philosophical reflection written by Alan Lightman, in his book, "Searching for Stars on an Island in Maine", to be a thoughtful way of trying to determine a point of view about "truth". I recommend this book because the examples written to describe the author's journey into understanding the human spirit make for interesting and enlightening reading.

Also, as www.mainewriter.com, the title obviously caught my eye when I found the book at the Topsham, Maine Public Library. 

Reading Lightman affirmed what I already knew about my own writing. I am never destined to be a philosopher.  His creativity is energizing, but I am unable to contemplate the depth of the concepts he so genuinely explores.

Lightman explains how he met a Buddhist Monk named Khema.

He then transitions the narrative into a chapter titled "Truth".

During my visit with Khema, he mentioned the Four Nobel Truths of Buddhism.  First, that life is filled with suffering.  Second, that the origin of suffering is the craving and clinging to impermanent things.  Third, that the suffering of life can be ended. And Fourth, that the path to that end is through meditation, self-discipline and mindful living.  Although the Buddha firsst articulated the Four Noble Truts 2,500 years ago, Khema was careful to make clear that we come to these truths through our own experience with the world. But, on other matters, such as their belief in the infinite cycles of the universe, Buddhists base their convictions exclusively on the words of the Buddha, a human being, born Sidhartha Gautama, later known as the lokavidu, the "knower of worlds".  

I thought to myself, "How do we know that the Buddha was the knower or worlds"? Were Einstein and Darwin also knowers orf worlds?  The truths and laws that we believe about the physicial and spiritual worlds....why do we believe them?  And, on what authority?

The concept of a law goes back at least four thousand years.  Long before laws for the physical world, the ancient Assayrians articulated their Code of Ur-Nammu. Those first laws were, of course, rules fo rbehavior in human society.  Quantifiable, only in the number of shekels of silver owed or quarts of salt poured into the mouth for each specified infraction. For example, "If a man proceeded by force and deflowereed the virgin slavewoman of another man, that man must pay five shekels of silver."

The Four Nobel Truths of Buddhism- are they laws?  Perhaps they are simply observations about the human condition.  Certainly, religious traditions have rules governing behavior, similar to the Code of Ru-Nammu. Not that human beings will always necessarily behave according to certain rules, as a drooped stone will necessarily fall to the ground. But, various theological traditions command us human beings to behave according to certain rules. For example, "Thou shalt not kill," the sixth of the Ten Commandments.  Or, from the Qur'an: "He (Allah) loves those who keep themselves pure and clean....When ye prepare for prayer, wash your faces, and your hands (and arms) to the elbows: rub your heads (with water); and (wash) your feet to the ankles". Such daily routines as the manner of washing before prayer may seem mundane and insignificant, but when they are described in the Qur'an, and considered the word of Allah, they are elevated to laws. Likewise, the statement that the relief of mortal suffering is to be had through meditation might seem like an opinion, or a bit of philosophy or a page from a self-help book. But, when it is uttered by the "knower of worlds", it takes on the imperative of a law, or an absolute truth.  (Here and in the following chapters, I use the words "law" and "truth" interchangeably, with the recognition that I am not being quite precise. I take a law to be a statement that expresses a truth. In science, laws are almost always expressed in quantitative and mathematical form.)

Science and religion differ profoundly in the way that truths are discovered. In religion and theology, these truths and beliefs seem to have two origins.  First are the sacred books such as the Bible, the Qur'an, the Vedas, the Pali Canon, and their interpretations. Believers assume that these books contain the true word of God or of special enlightened beings. If so, the authority of the teachings derives from the infinite wisdom associated with God,or the Buddha or other divinities. That divine authority can also be transferred to the authority of the religious institution as a whole, as in the authority of the "Church" in Catholicism, or the authority of shriah in Islam.  The second origin of truth is more personal, what one might call the "transcendent experience", which I will discuss more in the next chapter.  

Quotations from the sacred books are used to declare truths ranging from the origin of the universe, to the question of free will to the details of reproductive biology.  

For example, Saint Thomas Aquinas makes a difficult (IMO, difficult to read....) philosophical argument against the Aristotelian view that the universe has existed forever, but then falls back on Scripture for his authority:

"Potentiality is prior in time to actuality (although actuality is prior in nature), yet, absolutely speaking, actuality must be prior to potentiality, as is clear from this, that potentiality is not reduced to actuality except by some actual being. But, matter is being in potentiality. Therefore God, first and pure actuality must be absolutely prior to matter and consequently cause thereof: This truth divine Scripture confirms, saying: In the beginning God created heaven and earth."

Another leading Christian theologian, John Calvin, invokes Scripture to argue that everything that happens in the (physical) world, including the actions of human beings, is predetermined by God.  

As we know, that was chiefly for the sake of mankind that the world was made, we must look to this as the end which God has in view of the government of it. The prophet Jeremiah exclaims, "O Lord, I know that the way of man is not in himself; it is not the man that walks to direct his steps", (Jeremiah 10:23)....man can do nothing without the power of God... Scriptures moreover, the better to show that every thing done in the world is according to His decree, declare that the things which seem most fortuitous are subject to Him.

According to the Islamic hadith, the Prophet Muhammad caught these facts of reproductive biology:

"He is created of both the semen of the man and the semen of the woman. The man's semen is thick and forms the bones and the tendons. The woman's semen is fine and forms the flesh and blood."

Still today, many religious thinkers attribute absolute authority and absolute truth to the teachings of the sacred books, called, "divine revelations". Here is part of the announcement of the Second Vatican Council's Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelations, called Dei Verbum (in English: "word of God") and endorsed by Pope Paul VI:

"The books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings for the sake of salvation."

I respect the notions of God and other divine beings. However, I insist on one thing. I insist that any statements made by such beings and their prophets about the material world, including statements recorded in the sacred books, must be subject to the experimental testing of science.  In my view, the truths of such statements cannot be assumed*. They must be tested and revised or rejected as needed. The spiritual world, and the the world of the Absolutes, have their own domain. The physician world should be the province of science.

*This statement is probably directed to the "earth is flat" societies, the "Creationists" and, of course, to the "climate change deniers."

So, there you have it! "Let's Write", a contribution from the astounding world of philosophical thought.