I finally got around to watching The Life of Pi last night, and I have to say that I enjoyed the movie. One of the scenes that stood out for me (I’ll try not to ruin the movie for you if you have not seen it) is a conversation at the end, which features the question: “Which version of the story do you like?”
I hear many statements in our culture of late that imply a great loss of the pursuit of the full essence of truth. Justification and rationalization can be heard in expressions such as “your truth” and “my truth” to allow the freedom to believe diametrically opposed perspectives, wherein it is obvious that one or the other (or possibly both) can not be true. This may make it easier to be respectful of others, and tolerant of differing perspectives, but it also redefines truth as belief and/or perspective, sacrificing the essence of whatever truly “is”. I may think your name is Nancy, and I can belief it with all my heart, but the reality of what your name is, simply is. At this point some will argue that truth is not absolute or subjective, but rather lies somewhere in between.
The problem with the “truth lies somewhere in between” is that it fails to deal with one law of logic, that being the law of the “excluded middle”. As soon as we say “truth is…” it becomes an objective statement.
It appears to me that many do not sincerely pursue truth to know truth, but rather seek to position themselves within an argument that allows them to avoid the possibility of a truth that they do not prefer to hear. What need we fear in truth? What are we setting ourselves up for in the avoidance of discovery of what truly is?
