We're not being academic This page is not meant to be a philosophical treatise even though the subject of truth comprises an enormous body of philosophical literature, spanning many different theories by great minds such as Plato, Aristotle, Kant, Hegel, Kiergegard, Nietche and Whitehead, just to mention a few of the sources of wisdom. The academic study of these thinkers is not the issue in these pages because everyone knows what is meant by the truth on a day-to-day level. Every child can tell what is meant by telling the truth or lying. Every child knows that falsehood is not a good thing. This page intends to show how devastating falsehood can be − especially in the Israel-Arab conflict.

The source of most human misery is falsehood

ROGUES, tyrants and would-be-saviors feed on the inability of most people to recognize falsehood when it is glibly camouflaged by promises of material reward, national glory or spiritual redemption. The ability to recognize the lie or the half-truth would have stopped many a demagogue from sewing the seeds of racial discrimination, exploitation, poverty and war. For example, if more Germans had recognized the half-truths and specious blandishments in Hitler's rantings about German claims against their European neighbors and the Jews, he probably wouldn't have risen to power and plunged the world into a dreadful war which caused the devastation of his own people. Life is full of similar examples, where because of human foibles, falsehood is accepted − either as naive belief or because it's expedient − while the truth is rejected, leading to tragic consequences. The current issues of pollution, global warming, inter-racial hatred, extreme poverty and starvation, religious fundamentalism and wars in various parts of the world, offer clear examples.

Till now the spread of falsehood and its complementary side, gullibility have merely led to devastation and misery. But because of the intensity of pollution and the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by tyrants and religious fanatics, the consequences could mean the end of life on this planet as we know it within the near future − either through nuclear radiation or at a later date through the irrevocable destruction of the earth's ecostructure as a result of industrial and vehicular pollution. I cannot say that this will definitely happen but the scientific material indicates that we should relate seriously to these issues.

The dire need of the moment is to heighten our ability to recognize falsehood, especially when promoted for political, ideological, religious and commercial interests − and oppose it vigorously. Granted, this is a very complex expectation. We must learn the difference between really knowing the truth about something and just believing it, or not being sure about something; we must understand the pernicious comfort lurking in wishful thinking; we must learn to recognize demagoguery and glib propaganda, and to withstand the charm of smooth speakers and pay attention, not only to their appearance and style, but to their actual words; what is really being said, what is omitted, what is inconsistent with previous statements, what is unsubstantiated, what is illogical, what appeals to our sense of wishful thinking? Above all, we must be critically honest with ourselves.

In September 2001 nineteen educated young men had certain powerful beliefs about the Satanic nature of America and hijacked four packed airliners, deliberately crashing them into three strategic buildings, killing thousands of people along with themselves. Imagine the power of their belief! But was it the truth that prompted their actions? Or were they acting as the result of a set of notions based on lies and half-truths which were rationalized into unfathomable dedication − which they misinterpreted as the truth?

Believing and not really knowing

How can I be sure that something is true, or merely an assumption? I can know the truth about my height, for instance, by measuring and using universally recognized units of length.

On the other hand I can only believe that Napolean was routed by the heavy winter snows during his military campaign in Russia. I can only base my notions on Napoleon by what has been written in the history books. But I cannot recognize these writings as absolute truths. Even the greatest historians can only believe that what they read might possibly or probably have happened. Ultimately they can only assume the veracity of their sources, and that's the same as belief.

But let's face it, Napoleon's exploits have no bearing whatsoever on my life today. It might be interesting to know stuff like that, but it matters not a whit whether it was snow or something else that caused the great retreat.

But what about something vital like, say, my heart? I hardly know anything about it. Sure, I know it's got venticles and auricles and stuff like that. But I really don't know the first thing about what makes it tick. So when the cardiologists talk about the dangers of sugar and animal fats I cannot be one hundred percent sure that they are giving me the absolute truth on the subject, but I believe them because I've heard that they are thoroughly trained and there has been a lot of research on the subject.

Clearly we cannot limit our actions and opinions only to what is based on incontrovertible truths. Otherwise we would ignore important medical assumptions about diet, with possibly unfortunate consequences.

To a large extent we base our actions and notions on probabilities. I believe that the doctors are probably right about diet and exercise. Another daily probability is that if I get up at six thirty in the morning and have my breakfast at seven, I'll probably be in my car at seven thirty so as to probably be at work at five minutes to eight. Based on experience I'll more than probably be at work on time. That's not really the truth. But I can base my lifestyle on it.

The big snare

Our opinions are also affected by wishful thinking. This is something that most people indulge in. For instance, we use transport that runs on fuel, which is said to cause air pollution. We maintain a comfortable lifestyle by consuming huge amounts of electricity, which in most parts of the world is generated by coal (using the outdated method) which scientists have warned contributes greatly to the greenhouse effect. I don't have the scientific knowledge necessary to ascertain whether this is absolutely true. But I do believe that there is a very big chance that it might be true, and therefore I cannot rely on reasurances by commercially or politically involved people that there is no danger in pouring more and more fossil fuel emissions into the atmosphere. I have a bad feeling that because it's convenient simply to continue getting our energy from coal and petroleum, humanity is indulging in wishful thinking − that there's no need for us to worry about the future. But I think that there are times that even if one doesn't have incontrovertible proof one should remember − without being paranoid − that wishful thinking can be a dangerous thing. Meanwhile, the pollution continues unabated inspite of obvious global warming.

The truth in religion and nationalism

Coming to grips with the meaning of the word "truth" becomes trickier when inter-personal, inter-communal and international issues are debated. Truth becomes an even more difficult issue when religion is considered. Religion, and indeed every framework that purports to deal in truth and morality, must aim at truthfulness. Otherwise it is guilty of hypocrisy, by its very claim to deal in the truth. And this demands the honesty to recognize that belief, no matter how strongly felt, is not the same as really knowing something. Belief is really the same as assumption; it's merely a possibility, which means that you can't really know whether or not you have the truth about life's eternal mysteries.

Many people believe in a certain religious system, not necessarily because they've thought about its validity, but because there just has to be a God up there who is looking after us and who will grant us eternal life in the hereafter if we believe in Him. And that is really another form of wishful thinking. The pitfalls of belief without the balancing realization that it is merely belief, are evident when people kill other people of a different faith or ideology or opinion. Islamic suicide bombers illustrate this particular pitfall all too vividly.

An especially grim, relevant example of the destructive influence of falsehood and its acceptance is illustrated all to clearly in the Israel-Arab conflict. We have dealt in more detail on the next page.

International complicity in falsehood

Most of the international community keeps maintaining that there could be peace between Israel and the Arab world if only Israel ended its occupation of the West Bank, Gaza and the Golan Heights. What few people in the international community care to remember is that most of the areas in Judea, Samaria and Gaza had already been returned to full Arab jurisdiction following the Oslo Accords and then less than two years ago the Gaza Strip became completely free of any Jewish presence. But each Israeli withdrawal from these areas resulted in the almost immediate rocket assault and roadside ambush by Arabs against Israel, and launched from these very same withdrawn-from areas.

For a while most of the international community seems to have realized that the Arabs, at least from these areas, are not bent on a peaceful relationship with Israel. But the conclusion drawn by most of the international community, as well as many people in Israel, is that Israel must evacuate all lands occupied by Israel in 1967. Interestingly that wasthe time when yet another pan-Arab attempt at Israel's destruction was thwarted by Israel's defence forces. In Israel this is a very political issue, so I won't belabor the point, except to say: try and look at what we know about the past and be objectively honest about the chances of real peace if Israel keeps repeating unrequited capitulation.

Peace through truthfulness

The vast majority of the Arab people have been fed a lot of untruths regarding the background to their confrontation with Israel. As a result of lie, half-truth, exaggeration and selective omission, they have in fact prevented the establishment of an Arab state called Palestine (which was actually taken away at its inception by the Kingdom of Jordan in 1948.) Had the Arab people been exposed to the truth by a free press and democratic governments (which are missing) they might have made peace with the idea of a Jewish state after the first war in 1948. And had the international community related less cynically to Arab aggression and deceit instead of accepting it, and blaming Israel every time it defends itself, the big lie about Israel probably wouldn't have been perpetuated. The Middle East would have been a happier place for all.

Israel and integrity

So much for the Arab and international side of the coin. It seems clear that Israel has employed far less deceit and lie in its conflict with the Arab world. The reason I say that is because many Israelis have demonstrated an amazing capacity to try and understand and even sympathize with the other side. Many Israeli journalists and historians have related to recent history with uniquely harsh self-criticism, which has made every official Israeli claim related to the conflict questioned by the Jewish populace. That way falsehood tends to be prevented from becoming or remaining a mainstream imperative. (unfortunately the self-criticism, if not objective, can also represent falsehood.)

On a personal level, dealing with internal issues, Israelis still cannot be complacent about the level of their own truthfulness. Most of Israel's problems − communal, political, commercial and inter-personal − are caused or aggravated by falsehood. Government decisions are seldom taken on the basis of what's good for the country, but rather for political or financial expediency.

Politicians and other public figures frequently say one thing and are then caught out when it becomes clear that they meant something else. Religious political leaders employ half-truths or simply ignore salient facts (which is also a factor in creating falsehood) in order to increase their political influence or garner more monies for their electorate's interests, while seeming to care little about practical human and financial resources of this beleagured country. Israel's law courts are full of cases that were conceived through deceit and lie.

The low premium on truth and an understanding that it is all right to lie (if you can get away with it) makes one wonder about Israel's claim to chosenness. Seldom in history has any people failed so badly to live up to its name.

So what are we going to do about it? On a personal level the answer is really very simple! Just to make a resolution, not to indulge in falsehood. (I am making a mistake if I reckon that it doesn't matter if I might occasionally lie about little things and sometimes even about big things. It does matter because I am actually damaging myself by lying. Not a lot. But I am. That means that I am also weakening society. Not a lot, but I am.)

And if I tell you that I never lie, then habibi, I'm a liar!

Ralph (Rafi) Dobrin

But what about peace: is it possible? Click