news details |
|
|
| A PHILOSOPHICAL OUTLOOK | | Truth and elections in the Post-Truth Era | | Sanjeev Sikri
It is a truth universally acknowledged that we live in the post truth world. In 2016 Oxford dictionary chose ‘post-truth’ as the word of the year and defined it as “relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief.” In the season when elections have taken root in the politically charged India, the notion of our citizens being in the post truth era seems even more pertinent.
I am not here to fact check the subjective truths or as some call ‘opinions’ with the objective capital-T Truth or as some call ‘facts’. Rather to unearth a theory that we as a society are moving towards a decentralized state. Not just in the context of a decentralized currency or a move towards greater individual autonomy but to the extent where not even the authorities dictate the truth. Orwell would be sad to see his ideals of a power dystopia perish before it reached its zenith. In the post truth era, the job of dictating the truth is now with everyone who owns a mobile phone with an internet connection. In a time when truth is spread by peer reviewed statements rather than legitimate sources, the veracity (scale of truthfulness) compounds with every share. In a nation like India which has always been prone to majoritarian rule, pretty much like all democracies, public opinion being influenced by personal belief can have a spiraling effect on the sanctity of democracy. For the supposed ‘truth’ of the current state of affairs in the post truth era has more to do with alignment with personal belief and emotion rather than its reflection of the actual state of affairs.
In order to create the illusion of truth, repeat the lie often until it becomes the truth. Whether it be that a particular community is threatened to extinction or whether it be that a particular community is threatening to endanger another community. The more the message is forwarded across the brightened screens, the more one is acquainted with a proposition entailing a designed shift in one’s personal beliefs. Such a scenario explodes specifically around the time when the electoral polls are due. The purpose being simple, manipulate the emotions of the masses in order to attain a majority vote in the elections. The motive being rooted in the consequence of the lie. The utility of moulding the truth is greater than the truth itself. A view which resonates with the English philosopher Jeremy Bentham, who states in his treaties that the right thing to do is that which maximizes utility for the maximum number of people for the maximum amount of time. Therefore for a utilitarian in a majoritarian ruled state, as long as the utility of the maximum number of people is being met, there is nothing wrong with the moulding of the truth. The fallout of such a thought is evident in a diverse country like India.
“Yes it is true that I have heard this”, But is it the ‘truth’ that you have heard? That alone summarizes the concern of our times while we live in an ocean of information. We have been acquainted with propositions in proportions enough to alter what actually is the case. Beginning from, the “Garibi Hatao” slogan in the 70’s to the “Ache Din aane waale hai” 7 years ago. India suffers from both poverty of wealth (25.01% of India is multi dimensionally poor) and poverty of contentment (India ranks 139/149 in the Happiness Index), each slogan failing its purported goal. The battle is no more about displaying the truth but to win the “hearts and minds”, a race that imposes a narrative away from inconvenient truths. For inconvenient truths cradle the thought of revolution and revolutions are shunned by the ones in power. Whether it be a child revolting against his father or the natives of a land denying colonizers their forged supremacy.
In a state where the government majorly plays a paternal role, an estrangement is bound to occur in the idealistic view of the leader in the arm chair and the existential ruckus of the individual citizen. For facts and statements by the ruling majority is often a picture they would want to see rather than the corresponding reality. Such a state leads one to have hope, a hope for a better future and hope is a flame that never extinguishes. I have to repeat this again that all other flames of desires may fade out but the flame of hope is what keeps one alive. An apt ruler not only sells hope to the masses but is capable of manifesting that fruits of that hope he sold.
That too not in the Machiavellian sense of ill means to a good end but in a Gandhian way of the right means for the right end.
Now given that we are all part of the post-truth era, and truth corresponds to alignment with personal beliefs and emotions rather than correspondence with reality one ought to be vigilant with the personal beliefs one has. For example in the case of the natural law of gravity, it would be justified if a person were to hold a belief that a monster lives under the the crust of the earth that sucks the things inward rather than the mass of the planet playing any role in the process of gravitational attraction. The repercussions of holding such a belief that does not correspond with reality seems foolish in the domain of science but not essentially in the domain of the social sciences. For one can easily fall into the trap that English empiricist David Hume propounded that “Reason is a slave to Passion”. No matter what the reason of man may proclaim, if the heart is elsewhere it is bound to follow the heart, and that summarizes the inclination towards the post truth era.
Thus, in this election and many more to come in the post truth era, all one can do is to check if their personal beliefs correspond to the reality as much as they can. To self check the opinions that travel over the internet with that which meet the senses. The purpose is not to change the reader’s personal belief, but only to amend the personal belief about personal belief in a post truth world where truth is what anyone wants the truth to be other than the Truth itself. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
