Saturday, December 13, 2008

Objective, Absolute, and Universal Truth

“The idea of truth as objective is simply that no matter what we believe to be the case, some things will always be true and other things will always be false. Our beliefs, whatever they are, have no bearing on the facts of the world around us. That which is true is always true — even if we stop believing it and even if we stop existing at all.” -- atheism.com


“An absolute truth, sometimes called a universal truth, is an unalterable and permanent fact.” -- wisegeek 


It's popular in Christian circles to talk about Absolute Truth.  It's spoken of as one of those defining features that sets us apart from the rabble. While all the world is going to hell in a hand basket because they're a hedonistic bunch of Relativists, the Christians sit smugly upon their stack of Absolute Truths which, conveniently enough, can only be deduced directly from the their own religious text, the Bible. So if you were ever to come to the point that you agreed with Christians on their absolute truths, you'd have to first except the absolute truth that the Bible is the only source for absolute truths.  (This has been my experience, at least, when it comes to discussions among Christians on Absolute Truth.  I'm not trying to say this is absolutely always how the topic is approached.  I'm just giving a relativistic (and snarky) description based on my own personal experiences.)


And yet, if there is objective truth, shouldn't those truths, by definition, be evident, not only to Christians, but to all people? For example: “All people will die.”  This is a basic and objective truth that I think you would be hard pressed to find someone who would disagree with you on. (Of course, Rob's answer was a prompt, "But you can't prove that." I suppose that just because everyone that's gone before us has died doesn't mean that everyone now or to come will also die. So yeah, I can't prove that. Ironic, isn't it? Something that I'm pretty sure everyone would agree to as an absolute truth can't be absolutely proven beyond the shadow of a doubt. No wonder discussions of truth often end up sounding more like squabbles than revelations.) Though the Bible addresses the mankind and death issue ("There is a time for everything... a time to be born and a time to die..." -- Ecclesiastes 3:1a, 2a), I think you can find those who have never once read the Scriptures who would also agree with this truth. In my mind, the fact that you could find people of all ages, cultures and religions who agree with this statement is a strong indicator that the statement is a universal truth (even if you can't prove it). 


In fact, as much as Christians love to try to prove that there is absolute truth (even to the point of proving that what someone hasn't said is wrong), I think the real heart of the matter is not that there are those who believe absolute truth doesn't exist, but that there are those (most of us, in fact) who simply forget these absolute truths.  


And so, when someone comes along and reminds us of some of those absolute truths, their words have the ability to strike us at the core.  They resonate with what we have already experienced to be true, and they spur us on to remember and live by those absolute truths. 


A friend of mine recently posted Steve Jobs' 2005 Stanford Commencement Address, which resonated with me not only because I think it was a well written and organized speech (and because I think Jesus would use a Mac (a computer that Steve Jobs invented)), but because it jived so well with the book that several gals and I have been reading and discussing in our Bible study group on being peacemakers. Here was a man who attributed nothing to God, who very well may never have read the Bible, and who didn't in any way claim to be a Christian, and yet what he said struck me as being true.  It agreed with beliefs (I think of them as "truths.") that I have found in the Bible.  It agreed with experiences I have had in life. In my opinion, Steve Jobs struck upon several Absolute Truths in his speech. 


He had three main points: 

  1. The dots will connect.  Trust that and it will give you confidence.
  2. Crap happens. Use those times to start over - to redirect yourself again towards what you love. 
  3. We will all die. So choose well how you will live and don't get caught up in silly fears and pointless worries. 
OK, so point number one is the most shaky in terms of being "absolute."  Though many people believe in "destiny" or "karma" or "predestination," there are also many that believe life is random.  As a Christian, however, I find it interesting that Jobs would hit upon this point. Proverbs 3:5 says, "Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding."  In Steve Jobs-ese that would read, "Trust that something -- your gut, destiny, life, Karma, whatever -- is connecting the dots in your life.  Looking forward, you won't see how these dots are going to connect, but looking back, it will become clear." (That's not a direct quote from Jobs.  It's a rearranging of things he said into an approximation of the Proverbs 3:5 format.)  Jobs added that, "Believing that the dots will connect down the road will give you the confidence to follow your heart even when it leads you off the well worn path. And that will make all the difference."  

Jobs' second point, that loss can bring you around to seeking after what you love, is also something that can be found in the Bible.  Paul wrote that "when you put a seed into the ground, it doesn't grow into a plant unless it dies first." (1 Corinthians 15:36) The bounty doesn't come until after there's been the struggle that the seed must endure - burial, death, and new life from the husk that's left behind. Jobs also hit upon several other ideas under this second point: "Keep Looking, don't settle," "Sometime's life's gonna hit you in the head with a brick. Don't lose faith," and "You've got to find what you love." In other words, persevere, keep faith, and don't forsake your first love.  (Jobs sounds like a 21st century echo of Saint John as he wrote to the church in Ephesus (Revelation 2:1-7)).

Steve Jobs concluded with the point that I've already addressed above: We're all going to die. He says, "Remembering that I'll be dead soon is the most important tool I've ever encountered to help me make the big choices in life. Because almost everything -- all external expectations, all pride, all fear of embarrassment or failure -- these things just fall away in the face of death, leaving only what is truly important. Remembering that you are going to die is the best way I know to avoid the trap of thinking you have something to lose. You are already naked. There is no reason not to follow your heart." This is wisdom.  Steve Jobs has stated quite eloquently here what even Saint Paul struggled to get across to the early Christians living in Rome -- "We were therefore buried with [Jesus] through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life." (Romans 6:4) 

When Saint Paul entered a new city and started speaking to the people there, he often began not by pointing out all the ways in which he disagreed with them, but by pointing out a truth that they could all agree upon. For example, in talking to the men of Athens, he referenced one of their own poets, giving support to his words not by sourcing his own religious text, but by referencing something of theirs. (Acts 17) I can only imagine what our own society would be like if Christians stopped trying to prove that they had the corner on the market for truth and rather started reminding others of truths that we all agree upon (as I feel Steve Jobs has done, heathen though he might be). From there could spring other discussions, such as trying to determine the source of those truths.  But rather than pushing a cultural debate founded upon disagreement, we'd be beginning from a point of unity.  How different would our conversations be then?

Absolute Truth shouldn't be a dividing point used by Christians to attempt to chasten the world.  Rather, Absolute Truth should be that which breaks down the boundaries between us and others and enables us to speak with thoughtfulness, respect, and well... truth.

19 comments:

  1. Whatever non-christian say, do not believe. Have faith on our Lord and pray that He gives you strength and wisdom to difference truth and lie.

    ReplyDelete
  2. That's a bit harsh - I don't think it would even be practical to live my life like that.

    ReplyDelete
  3. An excellent post, quite "emergent" too :)

    To my way of thinking the logical outcome from this kind of reasoning, is a "Generous Orthodoxy" way of dealing with things.

    ReplyDelete
  4. so if a non-christian were to run over and tell you that your house were on fire, you'd disregard them because they can not be believed?

    ReplyDelete
  5. *eyeroll*
    "Generous Orthodoxy"how would you define/describe that? as i think about seeing truth as truth irregardless of who speaks it, "fearless christianity" is what comes to my mind. you're certain enough, in your own mind, of the source of all truth, that hearing it spoken by non-christians is not a threat but an affirmation.

    ReplyDelete
  6. As an atheist, I have to respond to this by saying: 2+2=4

    ReplyDelete
  7. You say that like it's a Bad Thing ™.

    ReplyDelete
  8. oh no. certainly not. i've been known to be a dork myself on occasion.

    in fact, i think there's some absolute beauty (hah! you thought i'd say truth, didn't you? well, i would have, but it didn't fit.) to being a dork.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think it's about finding common ground, about a broad base being a firm one.

    But I agree with your premise, nobody has the monopoly on truth, and I think that although the actual truth (like 2+2=4) might be absolute, the more interesting truths are the ones we find out for (or about) ourselves, which are completely subjective and non-provable and possibly non-true as well :)

    ReplyDelete
  10. like, that i'm a dork? ;-)

    i think that's what i liked about what jobs had to say. it was personal and yet not on an emotional/feel-good level so much (where i would just end up feeling queasy) but on a productive "this is reality. live with it rather than fight it" kinda level. you know, i wonder if that's what struck both rob and i in the movie "once" as well. rather than getting all gooey and emotive, the movie took stock of the realities of their lives and worked with them -- remained true to them.

    ReplyDelete
  11. short version: singing dude meets this piano playing chick and they make music together. the dude has a girlfriend in london and the chick has a husband in... romania or somewhere like that. so, there's the tension of guy/gal with commitments elsewhere. and there's the beauty of them creating music together and helping each other through a point in their lives. all of the dialogue as well as the music was made up by the actors themselves. there are several music scenes that play out in "real time" which you would think might make the movie drag. but it didn't at all. it was quite compelling.

    ... that said, heather didn't like the movie quite as much as rob and i did. (we chatted about it somewhere, but i can't find the conversation.)

    ReplyDelete
  12. Yes, very much like a Macintosh - fits in with your understanding of life rather than giving you a whole load of extraneous mush you don't need and doesn't mean anything to you.

    ReplyDelete
  13. http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2005/june15/jobs-061505.html

    1. Frankly, I think this point is more tautological than the others. All the dots you see necessarily connect: They connect through you. Furthermore, it's a self-fulfilling prophesy: it's in believing that the dots will connect that people make them connect.

    2. I don't believe loss is necessary for success. It's just easier to succeed without setbacks. I also don't believe people should stick to their first love either. Love can change, and if it's time to move on, then people should do so. I think the lesson to be learned by Steve's dismissal from Apple is that love will hurt, but that in itself shouldn't discourage people from finding and staying with what they love because love will also sustain people through bad times.

    3. I never understood why people react to their own deaths the way they do. I find the thought of other people dying to be distressing, but my own death doesn't bother me.

    The idea of success via having nothing to lose sounds somewhat like enlightenment via nothingness and reminds me of some form of Buddhism. (I don't remember anymore. It's been a long time since I played with such things.)

    Back to the original speech, I don't see how death is related to not living other people's lives or following their dogma. I don't see either as a waste of time. After all, if people are looking for setbacks to launch their success, "doing time" living someone else's life might be exactly the setback they need.

    I certainly don't agree with Jobs that old people need to die for things to change. Mythbusters had no problems teaching two old dogs new tricks.

    About Saint Paul referencing the poetry of Athens, aren't Christians warned that the devil will know and cite the Bible or something like that? Some speaking to Christians in the same way Saint Paul spoke to the Greeks might have been burned at the stake as a witch.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Hmm, I'm trying to think of a verse about the devil citing the scriptures. The only thing that pops to mind is when Satan quoted scripture to Jesus in the desert. But the scenario plays out much more like two Jews arguing a point using the same text against each other (think Yentl) than a warning against listening to Satan specifically because he's citing the holy text.

    I think that any argument against listening to Satan has more to do with the fact that he'll say something that may be true, but he's careful to leave out important information (such as when he spoke to Eve and left out the bit about dying if you eat the fruit). It's fine to hear the truth of his words as truth. But it's also important to fill in the gaps between his words, rather than accepting them as full truth. I think the same holds true for Jobs's speech or indeed anything said by anyone. If we swallow what someone else says without weighing it carefully and making sure first of all that it's true, and second that it's all there, then we're nothing but sheep, following whoever speaks soothingly to us.

    ReplyDelete