TRUTH OF THE UNTRUTHFULNESS

                                    TRUTH OF THE UNTRUTHFULNESS

                                                (MYKE IAN A. HECHANOVA)

There are many ‘truths’ just hovering above us. Well, not every one of these are indeed true, but are just claims in reality. People tend to confuse claims with truths, and sometimes even the Truth. Some even take truths as the Truth.

Man is an object of inquiry. A man by nature desires to know according to Aristotle and because of this “desire” to know things, it follows that as human people we are always an object of curiosity, so it became inevitable for us as a human beings to formulate many questions, to ask many things about our surroundings, our beliefs and even questioning ourselves making ourselves as an object of our inquiries.

Philosophy is concerned with speculations and navigations, particularly with reality. That is why Philosophers are known as “lovers of wisdom” for they seek and hunger for what really the purpose of our existence and search for its meaning that is worth living for. However, today’s generation neglected and abandoned the real property of consciousness. As they say, the truth today, might not be the truth for tomorrow.

Is there such thing as real? How can we know that there is truth? The worst thought perhaps that bothered me the most is that “Are we living in the faculty of truth?” Now, how does logic be of great help in knowing what is real and is not?

Most importantly, in Logic, truth value can be determined only if the proposition will be anchored in reality or based on a real-life situation. Isn’t it sound relative and subjective to the subject, who is the perceiver? I remembered the subject, Epistemology, the human intellectual activity of one of the schools of thought, empiricism. It tends toward the importance of experience which has a subjectivity to the experience. However, in the case of Logic, there is what we call generic truth that sets by the society itself that was agreed upon by many known as conventional truth. Hence, this universal truth standard cannot be legitimized by overruling the laws.

Furthermore, one thing that people forget to assess with is the enlightenment stage. Nowadays, human beings delve more into practical things instead of taking the path of a holistic perception. The same goes of Plato’s Allegory of the Cave. The prisoners that is being chained see only the shadow of reality in front of them. Unconsciously, prisoners believed that the only thing that exist solely is the object that is perceived. Not until, one of them was able to unchain himself and get blinded seeing the light. Likewise, there are still individuals who remained imprisoned due to the reason of they were afraid to explore things beyond their expectations. On the other hand, those who desired to try to risks and keep away themselves from the bondage of ignorance only savored the fruit of their labors. Thus, truth can be obtained only if we won’t remain imprisoned by our own prisoners.

As a Seminarian or in the context of seminary. How do we know the manifestation of objective and logical truths of seminary Formators in terms of decision-making involvements between seminarian-formation matter? During my propaedeutic stage (discernment stage), I wonder how do they manage to decide on giving a seminarian a recommendation to proceed to the next level and stage of formation. Is it possible to not-involved any biases? Feelings? Intuitions? Isn’t it sound unfair for those who have not been given an opportunity of their vocation, to become a priest? Well, formators have criteria in terms of deciding whether they will recommend a certain seminarian or not. This will serve as their guidelines to refrain from any biased judgments. Also, priesthood is not a choice, but it is a gift from the Ultimate Being.
            Going back to the path of truth. I am confronted by the query “Are we living in a truthful sense?” Am I just to believe that this is so because it is what the system teaches? But, there is something inside me that makes me restless if I just become contented with what is truth. Here, I am reminded of the importance of logic. To be logical requires profound mastery of a certain topic and argument. Hence, validity of the subject and reliability of a proposition must be supported by good evidences. Knowing when to believe something helps us comprehend excellent argumentation, and knowing logic helps us understand good argumentation. This may not be that appealing especially nowadays, as most would want empirical evidences or something that is explicit and evident.

 I am confident that my faith in God has the potential to lead me there. The Bible teaches that God is the only source of truth.  We can see that God is viewed as truth, goodness, and beauty in the Catholic Church's Catechism. Because God is Truth, believing in Him can help me discover Truth itself. As Xenophanes posited, we have to transcend or go beyond to understand the concept of God. Hence, the true understanding of oneself of man could lead to the understanding of God. Therefore, God is truth.