First Commentary for Simply Put #2

Simply Put #2

"Everything is relative" is an absolute statement that contradicts itself.

That perceptions vary is a powerful truth that helps us to take the position of others.

The important recognition of relative perception does not change the fact that truth exists independent of perception.

While it is noble to allow for and honor multiple perspectives on truth, this does not mean that  everything is relative.

The relationship between truth and perception is of the essence.

This is spiritual truth number two.

________________________________________________________________________

This points out the "performative contradiction" of extreme relativism. The statement that "everything" is relative is in a sense self-negating. If everything is relative, then this includes the statement "everything is relative" and therefore some things must not be relative, unless of course the statement "everything is relative" is an absolute statement - which would be self-contradictory... Thus the position of extreme relativism bumps up against a sort of meaninglessness.

However the recognition and honoring of multiple perspectives is important and powerful and need not succumb to extreme relativism - in fact it helps us to inquire into the nature of truth itself and into the relationships between perspectives/perceptions and what is actually true.

while there may be multiple perspectives on truth -  some are more provably valid than others, ie some are more true and some are less true, while some are just plain false.


________________________________________________________________________\


Simply put, there are three domains of reality.

These three domains are explored via three different methodologies or sciences.

The domains can broadly be called: subjective, objective and collective.

Their methods, respectively, are concerned with meaning, empiricism and ethics.

Each method has it's own ways of determining what is true within its particular domain.

We arrive at what is true by contrast with what is untrue, or false.

Truth cannot exist except in relationship to falsehood.

The idea that nothing is false because everything is relative is not only self-contradictory, but also a misunderstanding of the nature of truth.

________________________________________________________________________

This is a thumbnail sketch of the four quadrant idea from Ken Wilber's Integral Theory. The quadrants in turn are derived from what he calls the "Big Three" - the idea that goes back to the Greeks of the good, true and beautiful.

Goodness, Truth and Beauty can be associated with Ethics, Science and Art, or collective, objective and subjective, We, It and I.

So:

Goodness                        Truth                     Beauty
Ethics                                Science               Art
Collective                         Objective            Subjective
We                                     It                           I


Simply put, each of these domains represent different aspects of human experience and have different and discrete truth-claims and methodologies for arriving at and evaluating these truth-claims.

The most concrete of these is in the empirical realm of objective science, however even in something as subjective as art it would be impossible to attain a Phd were there not established and intellectually rigorous modes of discourse, criticism, and analysis that are used to evaluate and interpret. The same is true even in something like dream interpretation in psychoanalysis - there are better (or more true) interpretations and weaker (or less true interpretations) even of something as personal and interior as a dream... In the domain of ethics there is of course a philosophical method for discussing and assessing assertions of what is good.

The fact that the non-empirical domains allow for more relativity/subjectivity and are in some ways more convoluted does not mean that statements of truth and falsity do not apply.

This is also related to Wilber's idea of the "Three Strands of Science" a kind of broad scientific method that acknowledges the "Three Modes of Knowing" or the "eye of flesh (empiricism), eye of mind (philosophy) and eye of contemplation (spirituality.)"

Again, in contrast to the laziness of extreme relativism, or the flatlanding of all non-empirical endeavors as having no purchase on truth, this approach recognizes that a kind of scientific method is possible in all three domains - and that all three domains to have any meaning they must include notions of truth and falsity - even with the addition of healthy relativism.

________________________________________________________________________




Subjective hermeneutics concerns itself with discovering internal truth or meaning - art, literature, psychology, philosophy, meditation. Beauty.

Objective empiricism concerns itself with discovering externally verifiable truths -  conventional Science. Truth with a capital "T."

Collective ethics concerns itself with how best we should live together and treat each-other -  morality,  sociology, politics. Goodness.


                                                          ~

The trouble begins when we confuse any of these domains with one of the others, or reduce any of the domains to  another.

The traditional moral worldview has tended to want to limit scientific exploration and artistic expression.

The scientific worldview has tended to deny internal meaning and moral truth.

The popular contemporary spiritual worldview has not only tried to assert the primacy of  relative perspectives and intentionality over  empirical truth and moral judgments, but also has negated its own domain - that of hermeneutic meaning.

All three of these reductions are forms of category error - they have overstepped their domains and distorted reality.

_________________________________________________________________________


Galileo was in big trouble for making a scientific claim (the Sun does not go around the Earth) that contradicted religious doctrine. Part of the dignity of the modern era (viva la enlightenment rational!) is that science and religion started to become distinguished from one-another in such a way that empirical observation could be free of the constraints of superstitious religious dogma. This was also true for art.

When properly differentiated ( a function of evolution and development) Religion, Science and Art  have more access to truth - they can therefore be said to be healthier.

This represents the undoing of what can now be understood as a category error.

Confusing the domains with one-another, and/or reducing any one domain to any other domain produces category errors that distort our perception of truth and eviscerate reality.

Likewise dominating any of the other domains via the reductionism of any other domain is a big problem.

Empirical scientists try to reduce subjective interior meaning to neurochemistry and thus leave out something important about the nature of the self - something that can only be adequately approached via the methods of dialog, art and contemplation.

By the same token, many spiritually-minded folks over-step the power of interior mental activity and claim that it creates and is prior to the objective world - which is seen as an illusory projection of mind - this leaves out the reality of, say, a speeding two tons of pick-up truck (or to continue the 911 analogy from Simply Put #1 - an airplane travelling at 500+ miles an hour) that destroys mind and body in a split second without any intentional say-so from the victim in question.

Some social scientists will try to reduce all psychological and neurochemical phenomena to socio-cultural conditioning, which may of course leave out the reality of genetics and personal biography.

Each domain has important pieces to bring to the table - but the puzzle of truth is revealed best when category errors and quadrant reductionism is diligently avoided....

This is an ongoing process set in motion by the desire to integrate (which includes accurately differentiating)  Truth, Beauty and Goodness.

________________________________________________________________________


Working with the  three modes of knowing can help clarify our awareness of and relationship to reality and its truths.

It is good medicine.

In meditation, contemplate the nature of truth and falsity as it reveals itself in all three domains.

It is true that I am sitting in this room. I am not sitting in the room next door. (Empirical.)

It is true that I am sad about the loss of my mother. In this moment I am not experiencing joy. (Hermeneutic/Psycho-spiritual.)

It is true that I feel regret at how I treated  my friend yesterday, it is not true that how we treat one another does not matter. (Moral/Social.)

The breath moves in - it is not an exhale. The breath moves out  - it is not an inhale.

What are the different sensations I notice on the inhale and the exhale?

My experience keeps changing as the moments go by, yet still I am sitting here and now.

So it is.

________________________________________________________________________

More to follow in the meditation video on Simply Put #2.