Truth

Truth is the opposite of deceit. Truth and Deceit are mirror concepts which apply to living organisms, and generally, not to inanimate objects or non-life activity, To fully understand truth, we must also understand deceit.

In seeking truth, we seek the true representation of reality as applied to understanding and modeling life form structure and activity, including those of humans. In understanding deceit, we seek to unmask the deceit that hides the true representation of reality.

Our concern in Transcendent Reality with truth is focused on uncovering truth so that we may make well-informed decisions based on the best knowledge available – that our scientific facts are sufficiently correct and complete, that our philosophical models are sufficiently representative of reality, and that our religious models yield decisions that promote the greater good - our survival, continuance-in-kind, and prosperity.

Truth is reality – relative to life form interaction, and to human interaction in particular. The concept of truth – as the absence of deception – is quite simple. But finding truth beneath the layers of deception our fellow humans, and even ourselves, have heaped upon it, can be exceedingly difficult.

Consider the case study below for the pervasive occurrence of deceit and deception throughout our society.

A case study in truth and deception:

The University of Texas at Austin, Graduate School of Engineering - 1998. Two professors confront a doctoral candidate about his research that they initiated and supervise. The research measures the efficacy of a selection process for architect and engineering design service called “qualifications-based selection” or more simply as QBS. Both professors emphatically state that they support the QBS process, which is promoted by most of the formal engineering societies. In addition, many states, including Texas, and also the federal government, have passed laws mandating the use of QBS procedures for selecting architectural and engineering services.

In a conference room, the two professors and the graduate student review the results of the research. The graduate student reports that the data does not support the QBS process – that the claimed advantages of QBS - less construction cost and time growth, do not have a different statistical occurrence in QBS-procurred cases than in non-QBS cases. Thus there is no statistical advantage to using the QBS process.

Immediately the professors state that they are no longer interested in pursuing this research, and one of the professors begins to attack the capabilities of the candidate to earn a doctorate. It is clear the professors intend to “kill the message” by “killing the messenger.”

The doctoral candidate complains to the chief graduate advisor of the School of Engineering, and is told that such “blow-ups” between candidates and their advisor do occur, and especially with the two professors in this case. The doctoral candidate is told that he may select another advisor and topic from among the university faculty and no additional course work will be required. A new research subject, will however, mean a minimum of another two years or more of effort, and the cost of enrolling in the University each semester.

The doctoral candidate, after interviewing a few professors for a new research topic, elects to withdraw from the University with a Master’s degree, and enter a less re-known university to complete a doctoral program.

The above case actually happened. The propagation of a deception occurred at the federal, state, and local level, into the public sector and into the private sector – its range was enormous. The deceivers – established architect and engineering firms – successfully promoted the deception that QBS procurement procedures brought significant social benefit to the general public that outweighed its additional cost to the public. Colluding with these technical experts were academia – professors and Ph.D.’s, those we rely on to discover fact and truth. The truth, in this case, is that the only benefit gained by QBS was higher fees by architect and engineering firms, and that fact was actively suppressed by the very people charged with uncovering it.

Now, we should not be so naïve to expect advocates of a position or procedure that financially benefits them to clearly see or seek the truth, or to reveal it to others if they see it. In fact we should fully expect them to be biased. Moreover, such advocates may even believe their position is the truth, even in the face of uncontroverted evidence to the contrary.

The moral of this story is that we must actively seek truth, regardless of the authority or credentials of those who propose a contrary view. We cannot rely on academia, government, or private industry to look after our best interests. We must look after that ourselves.

It is the proclivity for deception and deceit among life forms, and in particular among humans, that make our search for the truth so difficult. However, no matter how difficult, Transcendent Reality holds that the search for truth is a noble and necessary action if we are to build accurate and useful models that yield useful predictions, and to make decisions that serve the collective greater social good – as measured by our collective survival, continuance-in-kind, and prosperity.

Comments, suggestions, or questions on the content, form or layout of this web site?