Is Truth Dead?

Last week I visited the dentist for a routine checkup and cleaning. The waiting room had a television on with 80s music blaring over it, not exactly the best place for quiet and thoughtful meditation, so I decided to read a magazine.

A recent edition of Time caught my eye. In big white letters over a black background it asked: “Is Truth Dead”? I expected to find an interesting philosophical discussion on the nature of truth and our society’s perception of and interaction with it, instead I found that the cover article was simply an editorial against Trump dressed up in pretentious and high-minded language. The article bored me so I turned to something else and I have no further comment on it.

I next turned to a short article on the gender pay gap. The article assumed, without presenting any evidence for or against, that the pay gap is real and that it is a huge problem. The focus of this article was how female professional athletes make less than male athletes. There was no discussion of the workings  of the market—e.g. of the fact that more people watch men sports than women sports so men’s sports generate more money, which in turn allows male athletes to make more money. Nor was there any discussion on the consequences of guaranteeing equal pay for male and female athletes—we either have to take money from male athletes and give it to female athletes or change people’s desires so that they enjoy and watch male and female athletic s equally. All in all, the article was devoid of any real content. It seemed to argue, in essence, good people oppose the pay gap, we oppose the pay gap, therefore we are good people.

I next turned to an interview with an actress that is playing one of the Power Rangers in the new Power Rangers movie. I was struck by the fact that the very first words were not her name, but rather the ethnicity of this actress. In the interview this young lady said she was proud to be part of this movie not because it is a beautiful piece of art or because it winsomely and boldly declares some truth, but because the cast was diverse and her character questions her sexuality in the movie. Now let me be clear about one thing: diversity is good. All men and women are made in God’s image and Heaven will be filled with people of every tongue, tribe, and nation. I think it is great that the cast of the Power Rangers movie is ethnically diverse (however I wouldn’t consider the expression of sexuality as a matter of diversity, but rather as a matter of obeying or disobeying God). Nonetheless, what really struck me was the fact that she was judging the merit of a work of art based on its conforming to a certain ideology! She seemed to be implicitly saying that all good people think ethnic and sexual diversity is good, this movie has both, therefore it must be a good movie.

Finally I turned to an article on the Bible. Certainly, I thought, I will read something of substance, if not value, in a Biblical article. I couldn’t believe what I read. According to a pastor/theologian who has just done a study on Genesis and published a book on his findings, Adam and Eve were really good people! In eating of the apple Eve became the world’s first true individual, which is what God wanted her to do. Adam likewise was good because he chose relationship over duty when he too ate of the fruit. Finally, the author asserted that the Bible clearly (!) teaches that gender is fluid given that God made “male and female in His image.” Why has this clear truth been hidden for so long? According to the author, men created religion and turned the Bible into a tool of oppression. The underlying assumption behind all this is that our ideas of individuality and sexuality are good and right, the Bible agrees with them, so it must be a good book!

I closed the magazine and I thought to myself, yes truth is dead, at least in the pages of Time magazine. Democratic-capitalism or liberal-democracy or whatever you want to call our political-economic system has stultified public discourse and confined thought within the bounds of a narrow and rigid ideology. Think about it: in the space of a few pages this magazine judged sports, art, and religion all the basis of whether or not they advance a certain ideology! For the editors of Time, truth is not objective, but relative to the promulgation of our current understanding of “social justice.” You almost have laugh at the irony of a magazine asking if “truth is dead?” without the slightest recognition that it is burying it!

Lenin believed that truth was dead. He judged everything: family ethics, art, sports, the church, businesses, etc. based on whether or not they advanced the interests of the Bolshevik Party—everything that advanced the party was good and true; that which hindered its advance was bad and false. I am not saying our society is communist or anything like that, but the fact is there is a sizable and noisy contingent in our society that is constantly judging universities, laws, movies, etc. based on whether or not they hold the line on the orthodox political ideology. This reduces truth to a state of relativity and in fact kills it.

Jesus Christ is the embodiment of Truth so Truth will never die. But in terms of public discourse it is dead. That is why we need Classical Christian schools to teach and pass on our heritage of the truth to the next generation.

If you are interested in reading more about how the West has adapted a rigid ideology similar to that of the old Soviet Union, check out The Demon in Democracy by Ryszard Legutko.

If you are interested in how we can hold unto the truth in a post-truth society, check out The Benedict Option by Rod Dreher.