Someone very kindly made some comments on my idea for a new student society, so I’m going to discuss some of the points that they raised. I don’t know who they are – I initially thought they were called Robert Frost before realising that was the name of the writer of the poem he quoted at the end of the comment!
He said: “I think it will be tough to make such a group work, because once you create a social group around TRUTH there will be pressure to conform and agree to some common points. Look at all the religions were you must accept someone else’s creed…”
It is a danger to avoid, yes. But I’m not setting up some kind of religion – there won’t be any “party line”, or at least, there shouldn’t be one. As you say, one of the challenges will be avoiding that kind of thing developing.
“On the other hand there are the Unitarian-Universalists. I really like their open-minded, many-paths approach to spirituality.”
I get the impression that you mean working on the basis that “there are many paths of truth” or “all faiths are a valid path” or something like that. But I think you’re in danger here of setting up a common point on which to agree. Many beliefs are exclusive in their claim to truth, including my own – Jesus claimed to be the only way to the Father. I think it would be very disrespectful for the society to insist to someone that their belief is just one among many if they do not believe that. To insist on that idea would hinder debate; questions such as whether all religions lead to God and so on should be up for debate, and not an article of faith. I want the society to be open to those who believe their beliefs to be the only truth just as much as people who believe that there are many truths.
I think that to allow everyone the right and responsibility to deciding their beliefs for themselves, and respecting them in that, is a better basis for interaction. This would simply be upheld in the society as simply a means to facilitate discussion, not as something that is necessarily good, right or true – that, like everything else, would be open to discussion. (From my own personal point of view, I think that people deserve respect, but beliefs, in themselves, do not.)
“In my opinion, TRUTH is a red herring. There are many epistemological reasons that most capital ‘T’ truths are unanswerable. And while many turn to FAITH and BELIEF, I would rather respect and appreciate the mystery of our existence than feign knowing what is clearly unknowable.”
But does that mean that it’s not worth searching for the answers? This is what I’ve got in mind for the very first discussion the society should have – what is truth, can it be known and is it worth searching for? The society is all about asking questions, and one of the questions we can ask ourselves is which questions are worth asking.
“My point is only why argue about some indiscernible truth. There are big questions facing humanity. We ought to focus on the practical and pragmatic truths. How can we manage natural resources in a world 10-14 billion people? How do we safe-guard and strengthen democracy and liberty? How does the brain work? The Genome? Quantum Dynamics? What meaning ca we give life? How do I protect and provide for my family in a responsible manner?”
I think those are great questions to ask and are definitely the kind of thing that I think the society should discuss. I definitely think that running a society like this should also involve putting things into practice and taking action, as I hope my description of my idea for the society makes clear. However, I don’t think the society should limit itself to the type of questions you suggest any more than the more abstract capital-T Truth questions.
Where I personally take issue with what you’re saying is the suggestion that you can somehow separate the big “indiscernible” questions from the practical ones. Our answers to the practical questions will depend on our answers to the abstract questions. I think that you shouldn’t tackle the big questions without considering the practical implications, nor tackle practical issues without considering the underlying questions and principles.
Admittedly my idea for the society is quite coloured by my own beliefs and thinking, but I have tried to work out the idea in such a way as to keep as much as possible open for debate.
I‘m going to go ahead with trying to set this up. There’s a “Refreshers Fair” coming up soon, where the student societies will again be setting out their stands in the Students’ Union, so I hope to talk to people from the different societies and try and get them interested in the idea. I’m really excited about it – I hope that it will help bring people together, and help discussion of important issues to take place, and hopefully motivate people to act on what they believe. I believe these are all great things to be working towards, and I’m looking forward to the challenge of trying to get this to work.
