Why Truth Matters [Hardcover]

The shocks of The Great War of 1914-1918 spawned a social movement known as "nihilism". Values once held meaningful were rejected by those who felt the conflict demonstrated such beliefs to be invalid. The Second World War may be considered the foundation for a similar movement arising in post-War France - "postmodernism". A close cousin of nihilism, the "French philosophy" strives to place all cultures on an equal footing. That equalitiy, moreover, is absolute - any declared stance must be granted equivalent respect with any other. Accompanied by many synonyms such as "cultural relativism" and "post-structuralism", the pestilence quickly spread in Western Europe where its symptoms are clearly seen in media presentations. More significantly, it became firmly established in the US, particularly in universities where it generated such programmes as "Women's [in a variety of spellings] Studies", "African Studies", all with a strong anti-Enlightenment and anti-science orientation. Benson and Stangroom here apply some vigorous therapy to counter the assault on rational thought. Although brief, this book is direct and incisive, clearly exhibiting the malaise infesting our universities and political institutions.

The purpose of this book is to re-establish that "truth" is indeed a valid concept. Postmodernism's contention that there are as many "truths" as there are tellers of it cannot be sustained. Benson and Stangroom, who founded the Website "butterfliesandwheels", explain that truth is empirically based and not a highly variant cultural phenomenon. Because our species appears to be the only one that can define truth, the authors address such fields as anthropology, evolutionary psychology, "women's ways of knowing" and various philosophies in describing how truth has been both supported and distorted.

Certain figures loom large in their presentation, Jacques Derrida, Richard Rorty and Sandra Harding, among others. The authors show how "cultural relativism" has attempted to discredit research in human behaviour with the objective of achieving "political correctness". In anthropology, for example, the episode of Napoleon Chagnon's work among the Yamomano of South America being falsely challenged raised a storm of controversy in the discipline. Although Chagnon was finally vindicated, the controversy brought suspicion on the science and besmirched Chagnon permanently. A related circumstance lies in the pronouncements of Sandra Harding that empirical evidence can have a gender bias and that a "feminist empiricism" should replace long-standing work. Harding, who still teaches at UCLA, has produced a population of graduate students who have fanned out to their own teaching posts and public affairs roles. Among other criticisms, the authors point out that even Harding admits her "philosophy" leads to a wide range of "ways of knowing". Women have indeed been excluded from science, but revising the methodologies isn't going to grant women more places at the lab bench. For all Harding's rhetoric, "E" still equals "mc2".

These examples indicate how knowledge, long and often painfully gained, can be cast aside in the name of some minority's demand for "respect". The authors make it clear that tearing down established knowledge and the methods of attaining it does not enhance or restore elements of society who feel they are victims of injustice. Part of the work of empirical research is to examine those injustices and right them. Their cause, however, isn't due to truth being false, but being misused. The fascisti mis-applied Charles Darwin's idea of "survival of the fittest", but that, the authors insist, doesn't reflect a flaw in the basic premise. The danger in not knowing how to make the distinction only results in repeating that kind of history under a new guise. Such distortions are being perpetrated in North American universities on a daily basis and carried into the public realm.

Postmodernism, the authors contend, is more than just a "philosophy". It is an assault on knowledge itself. By contriving the results of research into "tools of oppression", the postmodernists conveniently overlook not only how science works, but who is actually doing the "oppressing". Bench scientists aren't imposing social conditions resulting from their work. Science, no matter how haltingly and hesitantly, is the one means to establish what is valid. Its answers are authoritative because they can be proven correct or not. To undermine those answers through treating them as options instead of data, is simply to falsify the results. The Enlightenment began as a means of overcoming false mythologies. It's depressing to see how a new wave of such mythologies has required a re-starting of Enlightenment principles to overcome it. That long-held standard will prove the needed therapy. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

This elegantly argued work examines the reason why and the ways in which modern thought and culture dispensed with the primacy of truth, whether that of historical fact or science. Differences about the best way of discovering or defining truth are as old as civilization but the existence of truth itself was not in doubt. Benson and Stangroom defend objective truth, reason and rationality, making an inspired plea for restoring truth to a place of honor. Their arguments encompass examples from inter alia anthropology, psychology, feminism, politics and assorted philosophies.

The late twentieth century saw an assault on truth like never before. The legacy of the Enlightenment fell out of fashion and in its place came a bewildering tumult of irrational pseudo-philosophies like deconstruction, postmodernism, relativism and multiculturalism. A variety of ideological and political agendas gained prominence, various fundamentalisms resurfaced, pseudoscience & superstition sneaked into academia and the denial of historical fact became commonplace.

Seeking truth is a preference. Some people feel comfortable with ideological/religious authorities thinking for them. Others choose to inhabit a mental sphere where notions about truth are flexible and constantly shifting, mixed with emotion, wishful thinking and daydreaming. Then there are those who genuinely prefer to pursue truth even when it leads to the disturbing, painful or unpleasant. The authors argue that people who do not hold truth in high esteem are the ones most likely to believe that the ends justify the means.

The Enlightenment legacy is being challenged today by an array of fundamentalisms who wish to protect their doctrines/ideologies from critical scrutiny, by skeptics of the counter-Enlightenment who assert that myth, claims of revelation and even hallucination are the equals of rational enquiry and by obscurantist postmodernists who deny the existence of objective truth altogether.

In their discussion of philosophy, the authors point out postmodernism's origin in the skeptical tradition where reason and evidence were dismissed as mere custom. Divorcing truth from reason and reality, postmodernists claim that it is whatever a community considers socially acceptable. To them, everything is a "construct": science, law, art and rationality are illusions purveyed by rival interests in the pursuit of power.

Stephen Hicks' illuminating analysis Explaining Postmodernism: Skepticism and Socialism from Rousseau to Foucault is highly recommended. Despite it having been mocked by amongst others Alan Sokal & Jean Bricmont in the Sokal Hoax and Fashionable Nonsense: Postmodern Intellectuals' Abuse of Science, this mindset has made deep inroads in the humanities, media and popular culture. The sinister result is that the distinction between good and evil is simultaneously undermined, leading to indifference or even inversion.

It becomes impossible to discredit that which is harmful when solidarity displaces truth. And when emotion is raised above reason, civilization is disarmed of its most potent protection against the baser instincts: the shield of evidence. The book exposes a rat's nest of toxic thoughts espoused by the enemies of science from the romantic poets to the social constructivists like Richard Rorty and Bruno Latour.

The authors' observations on the interaction of ideology, science and politics encompass discussions of social Darwinism, eugenics and Holocaust denial with reference to the notorious David Irving. They explain why & how "Theory" courses based on conceptual or linguistic contortions multiply in academia, consider the many ways that truth can be distorted and examine some of the causes.

Postmodernists portray their anti-philosophy as a heroic struggle on behalf of the oppressed and non-western when it is really a betrayal, since reason, logic, evidence and the scientific method belong to all humanity. The actual tyranny is to permit authority to enforce its version of "truth" without reason or evidence, giving absolute power to tradition, instinct, tribe, nation, race or class. As for tradition, it has its merits as explained by Michael Polanyi in Science, Faith And Society.

Asserting that although truth is not demonstrable, Polanyi explains how it is indeed knowable. Because knowledge & understanding are filtered through language and culture we do not have simple access to objective reality. Benson & Stangroom advise those who think that matters of fact should be decided by evidence rather than ideology to view theories which establish a neat correspondence between the desired and the real with the utmost suspicion.

The authors conclude that truth matters because curiosity, interest, investigation, inquiry and enthusiasm are intrinsic components of human happiness. Humanity is the only species with the gift of conceptual thought. What a waste not to employ our capabilities in the pursuit of truth, which may be considered as both a goal and a search. The enemies of science accuse it of reducing the mysteries of life but the opposite is true -- it increases mystery by forever bringing new ones to light.

For further information on the intellectual enemies of the Enlightenment, I recommend The Reckless Mind by Mark Lilla, Experiments Against Reality by Roger Kimball and Last Exit to Utopia by Jean-François Revel.

Why Truth Matters by Ophelia Benson and Jeremy Stangroom, Continuum, 2006, 212 ff.

Exploring the concept of truth
By Howard A. Jones

Overall, this book is probably more suited to serious students of philosophy than for the general reader because it uses many terms, concepts and references (universalism, neopragmatism, cultural relativism, nihilism, etc.) the significance of which can only be appreciated by a fair amount of previous scholarship. Incidentally, nihilism is not a movement that originated from the carnage of The Great War. It is a term that has been applied to the scepticism of Pyrrho, the atheism of Nietzsche, and even to the anatta of Buddhism.

We all think we know what `truth' means: congruence with the way the world is. But the authors show that there are many shades of truth: `any kind of political theorizing is . . . likely to include an element of wishful thinking' - as when we were told that BSE could not harm humans and that contaminated meat was safe to eat. Indeed, our mistrust of politicians is partly because of their extensive use of `spin', a euphemism for lies, deceit and distorted truth.

As with Humpty Dumpty in his confrontation with Alice, there are many for whom the word `truth' means whatever they want it to mean. Thus, religious fundamentalists believe in the truth of their scriptures and the words of their respective prophets: adherents of other religions would disagree. The authors discuss the academic freedom of staff at Brigham Young University in the light of religious prescription. Benson and Stangroom also urge caution in assessing the truth of data when research is funded by commercial organisations.

This is a thought-provoking book that makes many valuable points, often in quite witty fashion. It isn't an easy read, but those who do get through it will be well rewarded.

Dr Howard A. Jones is the author of The Thoughtful Guide to God (2006) and The Tao of Holism (2008), both published by O Books of Winchester, UK.

What We Believe But Cannot Prove: Today's Leading Thinkers on Science in the Age of Certainty
Truth: A Guide for the Perplexed