The Fifth

Tea Time Rumination: Truth. It is something to which many resound with orations of self-dedications, and aspirations; however, in the end, many fall short of it. Truth, related to ‘troth’, and to ‘trow’, is quite a defining aspect of a life. If one willingly rejects it, one has still planted a landmark in one’s life. The core of my life is truth, or so I would aim—for the core of a life can only be weighed when the life is complete—. Truth has a connection to ‘trust’, or to ‘trow’; nonetheless, we modern humans are pre-disposed to distrust. Side note: a funny concept as with the word ‘distrust’, trust is still the main concept. This may mean deep down we trust, but then we ‘un-trust’ our surroundings. Now, one could apply this to a plethora of phenomena of ‘metaphysical’ nature, yet I am not at present. For me, truth must be examined in relationships, at least for now. I trust the truth of my friendships, for I have formed a troth—were you, the reader(s) waiting for that word?—with my friends. As such, if we accept that as truth—meaning trust—then any other ‘truth’ in my life, or any other‘s, is a troth. I trust my surrounding’s being to stay the same: tree will not uproot, clouds will not speak, and others. We, as beings, then are living in a constant state of trust when in flow with our natures. Following that logic, it is in our natures to trust immediately.
Hence, when do we learn/discover distrust, or turn off our trusts? Drawing from my limited comparative literature experience—as I would not be an English major despite the wisdoms of Dr. Beal, Dr. Tebbits, and, mostly, Dr. Boling; by the way, you guys are awesome—, there is always the discussion of ‘Truth’, and ‘truth’.
Truth, enforced always with capitalisation, is the idea of one truth. One should conjure up images of the Bible, Quran, and the like. Truth, only capitalised as the first word in a sentence—looking at you, e.e. cummings—, is the subjective interpretations of the world. One should think of the Talmud, philosophy textbooks, and the like.
I lean, unsurprisingly, towards ‘truth’ in the case of distrust. Each of us, as individuals, interacts individually with the world. Consequently, one’s trees may have been uprooted whereas mine are not. As such, we start to doubt: were our individual truths actually falsehoods all the time?
If doubting is the root cause, any argument deriving from distrust—hint:most are—is then really doubting of oneself, and of one’s truth. This may be exacerbated by 2 of 3 major monotheistic religions. Christianity, and Islam offer one way, or ‘Truth’, to be a ‘good person’. Judaism, though a strict religion, actually offers two sets of rules to be a ‘good person’: rules for Jews, and one for goyim. This is even further multiplied by the Talmud: a collection—either Babylonian, or Jerusalem Talmud—of rabbis’ dissecting that which one should do to be a ‘good person’ by Jewish laws. So, if one looks at Christian, and Muslim countries—actually Christian, or Muslim, not just high populations of either—one sees societies built upon distrust. Sure modern Israël—pronounce both vowels, silly goy—has distrust of the world, but it seems based in reactionary conquest versus proactive as the other two.
Yet, religion is not every aspect of one’s life. We have nation-states now. These carry the theory that someone in Anaheim has anything in common with someone in Buffalo, that someone in Inverness has anything in common with a Glaswegian, or a Chti with a Marseillais. So, we are grouping different cultures under the idea of sub-cultures, which are a fact of life. An American example, Southerners talk about ‘Southern etiquette’ different than ‘Northern etiquette’: in Texas, I hear about West Texas versus East, North, Central, and South Texas. As a Californian, I am firmly a Southern Californian as opposed to Central Coast, Northern, or inland—side note: go Ducks!—. We, then, encounter those outside of our culture, but are forced to try to connect with their truths which are radically different than our own. How do we deal with this important issue of human interaction? We are seeing nation-states break-up, and the idea of smaller communities is seeming more appealing in the ever present cycle of civilisation, but how do we reconcile the idea of one ‘Truth’ as individuals? Are we to become one homogeneous, and nameless population? I don’t know, but I want more tea.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s