"Pertinent Truth"

Abstract:

This theory takes, at least in part, from my observations of contemporary American culture, morality, and values. I see our mentality these days (our strive for equality, our rejection of violence and war, and rampant liberal ideology) as a logical attempt to quell what some might call our basic animal drives and desires.

It also takes from my observations of the limited spectrum of human understanding. We, as human beings, attempt to understand and make sense of the universe. This is, I believe, an impossible act and a fallacy. Our logic, our only "reliable" tool to discerning the happening of the universe, is fundamentally flawed. It requires its own validity to be true in order for its effects and discoveries to be valid and true, something that we can never really prove.

Flaws of induction, the illogical nature of the universe (i.e. the fact that not everything makes sense to us) leads us to have to disregard a humanly understandable rationality. That is not to say, however, that rationality does not exist; just that it does not exist in a way that humans can truly be aware and intelligent of. Granted, this is a common acknowledgment in philosophy, and often we reconcile it, but it is still nonetheless important to point out that we create our own sense of truth and rationality, one that is not True, but one that is comprehensible.

It can therefore be said, with some degree of accuracy, that our meaning and truth is arbitrary, not reflective of a universal (of that kind, only God can know). We must then look at the benefits of, and take an active role in constructing, our own truth. Perhaps I may be jumping ahead too far in my theory, but take my first example: God. God is something we will never understand, a strictly inhuman truth. Because of this, because as humans we will never know God, see God, or have God in our minds, God has no weight. No relevance. What is the point in lending our concept of existence to (which really is the definition of existence) something that can not exist?

I therefore propose the concept of something that we hold as true, regardless of it is or is not universally true, based on its merit to us as human beings. I would call it a "pertinent truth", something not quite relative (for it should be generally acknowledged as true based on several criteria for what defines truth - i.e. the basic pattern of human behavior, and perhaps even the need for some concept of a God, strictly for the value of believing in a higher power)