[Gemme]

I was listening to one of my current favorite songs and this thread came to mind.



"Cuz I'm living my truth without your lies"

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

But what if someone's truth is that their thoughts don't lead to hurtful actions or if they do the person's hurt are not inside the circle of moral concern. Then what? Since there is no reason to *prefer* non-hurtful actions as a touchstone if someone holds a truth that leads to harm, all we have is 'I don't like that so please don't". That seems a flimsy basis upon which to build any idea of justice. What we *can't* do is argue that the person holding the truth that leads to malevolent action is wrong because it's their 'truth', so it *can't* be wrong. It can't be wrong even by our own lights since your truth may be that racial discrimination is wrong and my truth may be that racial discrimination is wrong and Ebon's truth may be that racial discrimination is wrong but *of course* we would say that. We all have a vested interest in it being wrong. But since we have conceded that if you believe something is true then it IS true--for any reasonable definition--then all someone has to get around the codicil that it can't lead to harm is for that person to say "racism doesn't hurt people, of course those on the receiving end will *say* that it hurts them but what else would you expect 'those people' to say?" Now, they've stated that their 'truth' is that racism doesn't hurt people. If you insist that it does then they can even concede that it might but that the targets of racism are beyond the circle of reasonable moral concern and the same way you wouldn't, say, crash an airplane with 300 people on board in order to save the life of an ant, one should not force society to roll into the circle of moral concern people who are clearly beyond that circle--it is their truth after all and there is no reason that anyone can give as to why *your* truth is preferable to *their* truth.

Cheers
Aj

This is interesting. You took me saying that I wished more people were about letting people do their own thing, as long as it didn't hurt anyone....it's been a long time but I do believe I had those who perpetuate against homosexuals and our community in mind when I said that....and somehow turned it into me saying something about a system of justice? I'm sorry. I am just not following.

Of course anyone can say that something is their truth. A pedophile might say that their truth is that children like to be touched by them. Would I believe that? As a survivor, I would say absolutely not. But I will not take their right away to say it. I may argue it with them but I won't say that they can't say it because I don't agree with it.

To me, if that line of thinking is truly what they believe, then I believe...in this particular instance...that they are more dangerous than other pedophiles who believe that their victims do not like their touch.

But, I can't say that that isn't truth. They may, indeed, believe that. For them, that is a reality.

Originally Posted by tapu

So "my truth" means, more or less, "my experience"? I think your explanation of the meaning is excellent, Jo. Now, since there has to be a way to express that otherwise, I'm trying to think what it is so we can arrive at the beginnings of a definition.

Yes. Also, my "truth" may be exchanged with "perspective". Basically, this says to me that this is how I, or you, or anyone else sees things or a particular situation....whatever the discussion is about at that moment.

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

That use of 'my truth' is, more or less, unproblematic since it really does not effect the world the rest of us live in. If that were the *only* way that people use that phrase, I wouldn't be concerned (and probably wouldn't be involved in this conversation). My concern is that people don't draw a distinction (presumably because they do not see one) between the following kinds of statements:

1) If there is not some kind of intellectual meeting-of-the-minds I am not going to be happy in a relationship.

2) If we allow marriages between two men or two women, we will have to allow marriages between father and daughter or a 50 year old man and an 10 year old girl etc.

The problem isn't statements of type-1, the problem is statements of type-2. I think we should not evaluate the 'my truth' idea on the basis of type-1 statements but on the basis of type-2 statements.

Cheers
Aj

I honestly don't know how to respond to this. People are going to think what they are going to think, regardless if they preface that thought with 'this is what I think' or 'this is my truth' or whatever.

Originally Posted by JustJo

Right....I could say "in my experience" or "in my case" and those would both work. I use those as well. I think I tend to use "my truth" when it's a stronger, more fundamental, more visceral usage.

So......in my case I prefer my coffee black. My experience is that "surprises" generally don't turn out well for me, so I prefer to know what's coming next. But my truth is that I must have a passionate connection with my partner.

It's a good, better, best kind of usage....if that makes sense...

Right. I think the problematic part is that many of us who use this phrase use it in different ways.

Yes, exactly.

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

Yes, precisely. I would feel better about the whole thing if people would designate or define what truths they are talking about when they speak of 'my truth'.

Cheers
Aj

Their own truths.

It could be anything from how they see a political situation to whether their son was really out or if the umpire made a poor call.

Originally Posted by tapu

Jupiter has 30 moons can't be "my truth" even if I fervently believe it. It's something I could be wrong about and I know it, and even if I don't it has a different essence than "my truth": The way Jo (and others) are explaining "my truth," the determiner of what is true is internal to the speaker. It's not an empirical fact; it has an external truth condition.

Or something like that.

Yes. It's completely internal and may or may not match what others see externally.

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

I have read the phrase (or one of its synonyms) used here in the problematic context (not wanting to reopen old wounds I will not go into specific details about the incidents I have in mind) which is what sparks my interest in the matter. If you are talking about your own interior landscape then 'this my truth' is almost entirely unproblematic. If that is what is at issue, then my question changes from what 'this is my truth' buys us to why anyone would take the statement "my truth is that tequila is yummy" as being at all problematic.

Cheers
Aj

For myself, using your specific example, I wouldn't. I find no issue with someone thinking that tequila is yummy. It's my truth that it isn't.

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

See, I think that the problem with using this construction of things being 'true' for people is that we aren't being clear about the subject matter domain. I think that, for instance, there can be multiple truths (within reason) about what makes a successful relationship. Even here I would have to draw a line. If a neighbor tells me that it is 'true for them' that beating their spouse makes their relationship healthier I'm not going to 'respect' that 'truth' and avoid calling the cops. If one is talking about your own interior landscape then sure, we all have our own truths but this observation still--even after a couple of days of sitting on it like a hen--strikes me as trivial to the point of banality and if that is what we are talking about I'm *still* confused why anyone would find that at all controversial.

My concern is not when people are talking about their own interior landscape but when they are talking about the world we all share. That is the more interesting (read problematic) use of the phrase.

Part of my problem in understanding what we are talking about, at this juncture, is that my use of the word 'true' is perhaps more constrained. For me, something is 'true' if the statement accurately describes the world in such a way the world is obliged to actually conform to that description. A couple of examples will, I hope, suffice.

1) Earth rotates on its axis every 24.25 hours and is tilted at 23 degrees relative to the plane of orbit.

2) Barack Obama is the 44th President of the United States. George W Bush was the 43rd President of the United States. William Clinton was the 42nd President of the United States.

3) Ordinary (light) water is dihydrogen monoxide, meaning that it has two hydrogen atoms and an oxygen atom.

4) Hydrogen has one electron and one proton.

5) All life on Earth is descended from a common ancestor and has diverged in the last 4 billion years by a process of mutation and natural selection.

You get the idea. My concern is not when people make comments about their interior landscape but when they argue that they get to have their own 'truth' relative to any of the class of ideas above. If we're *only* talking about interior landscapes then I return to my question of Monday--what about saying "my truth is..." interests people? If we're talking about the larger, more generic question of epistemology then I have to ask if the idea of each of us having our own 'truths' can even hold itself up under its own weight. It seems to me to be demonstrably false even by its own lights.

I say that because, for instance, if we each have our own truths and we need to treat those truths as valid then *my* own truth is that we *don't* have our own truths.

Cheers
Aj

I do see that it's the word 'truth' itself that is the hang up.

I think that we all have a need, at some point or another, to express ourselves and our opinions to others. Using 'my truth' just emphasizes that that particular opinion is how we know things to be and maybe we use it because it's close to the vest for us. I know that I tend to use it when talking about things that are more on the personal and/or intimate side of things.

I would not say 'this is my truth' when talking about donuts. Not seriously, anyway. I would probably use it when discussing my childhood or a cause that I find worthy.

It's one thing to wonder why people say the things that they do, but it's another altogether to ruminate on the validity of that person's choice of using that particular word or phrase. That's where I get squinchy....when someone casts judgement upon me for saying something as simple as 'this is my truth' just because it doesn't sit well with 'them'.

And so, I'm back where I began with this months ago.

*shrug*