Objective truth is a relatively modern concept, enabled from the Enlightenment onwards by the confluence of scientific method and communication media. Evidence-based facts gained credibility particularly in the last 100 years, thanks to the rapid growth in technological innovation in both fields.
Who today believes the world to be flat? And yet we have would-be leaders around the world who prefer disbelief in science over verifiable truth, belief over knowledge, denial of human influence on climate against copious evidence or claiming rights bestowed by mythical deities. Why do people place their trust in these?
In his seminal history “Sapiens”, Juval Noah Harari shows how one of early homo sapiens’ differentiating faculties was the ability to imagine and to communicate fictions. Imaginary threats or inspirational deities engendered cooperation and the formation of communities.
For thousands of years there was little possibility of establishing, let alone communicating, facts or evidence which might challenge such fictions, so it is not surprising that these were received with credulity.
Increasing evidence – and reasons to subvert it
Today, where relevant evidence is clear, there is little excuse for failure to challenge irrationality. Human creativity having finally made objective evidence accessible, we can now have government based on truth rather than myth. It is, though, remarkable how myths and religions have survived this challenge.
Sometimes vested interests play a part. The already rich like to cling on to their sources of wealth. Those with power may deny evidence which they find inconvenient, even seeking to censor universities, companies and artists. They rely on that primal faculty for effective fiction, sometimes in the form of lies.
Hence the continuing use of fossil fuels to the detriment of all future generations. Hence incomers riding roughshod on ancestral occupation rights. Trust in politics can only be going backwards as a result. Admiration for creativity is clear when it comes to the arts, but inventing truth when holding positions of responsibility is more commonly called corruption.
Potency of story-telling
Fiction has been a cornerstone in two facets of our story: dictatorship and religion. Both have made effective use of myths to attract mass followings. Few can deny the power of the Nazi rallies in impressing the people with the Aryan myth. Just look at the spread of impressive places of worship to appreciate how human-authored spiritual inspiration reached and won over all levels of society, embedding it for generations to come with its messages of hope, no matter how unsubstantiated.
Until the notion of objective truth was made reality such credulity was natural and has proved hard to displace. Look how the Orthodox church survived the Soviet era in Russia. Look at the longevity of myths of national heroism or victimhood among the peoples of the world. Story-telling has such powers, especially when delivered in awe-inspiring productions or by great communicators like Jesus or Mohammed – or Hitler or Mussolini. Today millions follow the siren fictions of Trump, Putin and Farage.
For those who would oppose such spinners of fiction, what recourse is there but to point to evidence, to rationality, to fact not fiction – but unless the narrator of this honest polity is also charismatic and able to spin a tale as effectively as the storytellers, who is going to listen? Story-telling is more engaging than rational explanation.
Hope’s seductive powers
How can careful, crafted Whitehall-speak compete with loud, blatant lies or, even more seductive, with a picture of hope? For hope is what lies at the end of the belief system rainbow.
Whether offered by a faith or a political party, hope is what people need, especially when times are, as now, challenging. Proffered by a convincing demagogue, hope may be a powerful lure, even when unsubstantiated. How can austere book-keeping or “more of the same” compete?
Most people today are neither interested in politics nor particularly susceptible to charismatic preachers. However, some are and there is an irony here too. Past generations have respected and willingly followed politicians with articulacy, clarity of purpose and personality: Lloyd George, Churchill, Bevan, Thatcher. Under leaders like these, governance has been based on the latest knowledge.
When Blair took us to war on false premises, this was rightly decried. A dearth of credible leaders today is increasing disengagement from mainstream politics, paradoxically opening the window wider to the inventions of charlatan demagogues.
Things do not have to be this way
The people do not have to succumb to charlatans. Education has encouraged the challenging of assumptions with evidence. Hope does not have to be the exclusive property of fiction. Leaders and media of credibility and honesty exist.
Surely it is preferable to trust in fact over fiction; in reason over belief, in facts over stories? We have surely progressed that far in 30 millennia?
CLICK HERE TO DONATE TO OUR CROWDFUNDER
HELP US BECOME STRONGER SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO DELIVER POWERFUL CITIZEN JOURNALISM!
