I grew up in a very insular community in the American Midwest. And when I say insular community, I don’t mean an isolated or standoffish community, or even a geography – I mean a self-contained ideological community. A community defined by a set of rigid beliefs. We even called ourselves believers.
I won’t go specific regarding that particular believers’ community or anyone else who was part of it. I was born into it, and the rest you can guess; it’s not exactly an original story.
But as I grew, I inevitably learned that such communities of believers will invariably present the beliefs that define them as truths. And I inevitably learned that all such communities claim the beliefs that define them as truth, and that these truths are all mutually exclusive, and that is the ironic and tragic truth that defines most of the horror that exists in the world.
Most people are happy with their beliefs – unsurprising, as most community-defining beliefs are deliberately engineered to be emotionally comforting and reassuring. Most people never go any further in the pursuit of actual truth, for actual truth does not promise emotional comfort or reassurance.
But it is no great leap, if one gives the matter even a few moments’ thought, to realize that if one clings to a set of beliefs that contradict those of all other human communities, and the only thing to recommend them is that they are emotionally comforting and reassuring, then that emotional comfort and reassurance is based on false premises. If the only thing making my beliefs superior to those of others is that I was born to them, then the lottery of birth becomes the dispensary of truth – and that is a ludicrous thing upon which to base one’s life and happiness.
“Most people don’t really want the truth,” said Ranveer Allahbadia. “They just want constant reassurance that whatever they believe is the truth.”
Growing up, I had bucket after bucket of that constant reassurance, but it was also increasingly clear that Ranveer is right, though I had not framed my experience within his claim at the time. As I surveyed other belief-based communities, from the religious to the political to the social, I saw this dynamic playing out all around me.
Very few people want the truth. Very few people make any effort to find it, let alone to immerse their lives and experience in it. They are content with mere belief, unconcerned about the actual reality behind their beliefs; they are easily convinced that their beliefs really represent actual reality, but are completely disinterested in testing that assumption.
It’s easy for even those determined to immerse their lives in truth to adopt a conciliatory position at this point, asking only that they be allowed to break from the pack as they wish the reassurance seekers well. But while acknowledging Ranveer’s axiom is certainly a positive start, there’s more to it.
Ranveer is right, as far as it goes. But his claim offers no specifics about the nature of beliefs that many accept as truth, or the dangers of constantly ingesting the reassurance that fortifies them.
What happens when the beliefs of a particular community, parading to its members as truth, are toxic? What happens when embraced ‘truths’ are destructive?
On this point, we’re offered a revision of Ranveer that shines light more deeply: “Most people don’t really want the truth,” writes Jim Wilhelmsen. “They’re just looking for answers that confirm their prejudices.”
Yes. Now we’re seeing the problem, and it’s no leap at all to survey the world around us and look over our shoulder at our history and see that this is how Ranveer’s dynamic plays out, more often than not.
This is no great revelation, and my own story is nothing special. The moving parts here, though, seldom get called out specifically, so it’s important to note where things are brittle:
When beliefs are accepted as truth, then the reassurance or answers that confirm them are likewise considered ‘truth’ by extension, with even less critical analysis;
When members of a community employ this style of thinking to living, they are taking up lives of perpetual acceptance of unvetted information;
When this involves beliefs that demean or harm others beyond our group, and we consider that harm to be based on ‘truth’ and the information supporting those actions to be ‘fact’, we are straying into territory that not only has nothing to do with truth, but a way of thinking that is openly immoral.
Leaving the safety, security and emotional comfort of belief behind in search of bona fide truth can be unsettling and even frightening. Emotional comfort and reassurance become much harder to come by, for one thing – but they are much more authentic and fulfilling when they are found. And embracing the understanding that information that serves no purpose other than the bolstering of falsehoods is toxic in itself is both emotionally and cognitively healthy, making for a stronger mind and more sure-footed heart.
But the greatest gain to be had from abandoning the belief-based community for the authentic quest for truth is this: it becomes much, much harder to misjudge, and consequently mistreat, other people – and it becomes harder still for such behavior to make us feel good.
Comments