HERE COME DA JUDGE – PART 3

Is there a universal truth about what it good and what is bad behavior? That’s the question that ended Part 2 of this post about judging other people’s behavior. My answer to the question was, “I don’t really know – probably. But, what I do know is, it is highly unlikely that we human beings will ever agree on what that "universal truth" is. I went on to say I would explain why in my next blog post. It had to do with how our brains process information.

This is the explanation I promised. This is how our brains process information.

We take in data through our senses. Then we compare that data to the knowledge we have stored in the file cabinets of our brains to try to identify it, or give it meaning. We then make assumptions about the meaning we have given the data based on the experiences stored in our memory banks. Those assumptions become our perception of reality – our truth.

Centuries of experience and a lot of research has shown us that our senses are notoriously unreliable. If a half dozen people witness a car accident or a crime being committed and you ask them what happened, you’ll get six different stories. Anyone in law enforcement anywhere in the world will tell you that’s a fact. And, it should be obvious that no two human beings have the exact same knowledge or experiences stored in their brains. That makes it very unlikely that any two of us will have the exact same perception of reality in any given situation. In other words, unless we are willing to accept someone else’s perception of reality over our own perception of reality, and why would we do that, truth is in the mind of the beholder.

If we all have our own perception of reality, our own truth, and we can’t agree on what a “universal truth” might be, assuming there is such a thing, how do we live and work together as human beings on this planet? We have two choices. We can try to impose our perception of reality, our truth, on other people using reason, manipulation or force. Or, we can create a democratic system of governance to make laws that protect the rights given to us by our Creator (whatever or whomever we believe that to be) to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”. Then we all have to agree to live within those laws and allow everyone to hold, follow and voice their own perception of reality and believe in their own truth.

I am pretty sure this second choice is what the founders of the United States of America had in mind when they issued their Declaration of Independence 243 years ago. Of course, their original thinking had its flaws. Their definition of “all men” being created equal wasn’t sufficiently inclusive, but the trend throughout our history has been to correct those flaws by broadening the definition of “all men” to include every human being. It was a very liberal (from the Latin liber, which means free) and revolutionary idea at the time. I think it is still a very good idea and one we all need to embrace if we hope to survive as a species on this planet. What do you think?