I don’t usually wade into religious thought but End the War on Freedom has a quote about honesty that was too good to pass up. I checked out the original source (a 1954 newsletter) and grabbed a snippet. Here it is (linked to the original source):
“When an honestly mistaken man sees the truth, one of two things happens: (1) he will either cease to be mistaken, or (2) he will cease to be honest. For he will either accept the truth or he will reject it. If he accepts it, he is no longer mistaken; if he rejects it, he is no longer honest. It is as simple as that.”
The entirety is more religious than I roll…but the point about honesty and truth is spot on and applies in not only religion but in thoughts of any type.
With the greatest of respect to the original author and to yourself, that quotation leaves out one very important point.
Truth isn’t subjective, but objective. It has an existence, a reality, independent of the world-view, or perspective, or ideological limitations, of anyone seeking it. If it’s not objective, it isn’t universally true, but only true in certain situations or for a given combination of factors – in other words, it’s not true all the time for everyone.
So, for an ‘honest man’ to ‘see the truth’, this necessarily implies that:
1. He is capable of ‘seeing’ a ‘truth’ that has, until now, been outside his perspective or frame of reference;
2. He is able to make the conceptual leap that will allow him to recognize (1) as the truth;
3. He is able to overcome the prior ‘conditioning’ (childhood upbringing, limitations of his present world-view, cultural constraints, etc.) that have previously prevented him from accepting the existence of an alternate ‘truth’, and adopting that ‘truth’ in preference to the ‘truths’ he had previously accepted as true.
This also means that religious ‘truth’, being non-scientific and therefore non-objective in a physical sense (i.e. it can’t be evaluated outside the human mind and the theological/ideological framework of that religion’s particular ‘revelation’ or frame of reference), can’t be something that can be independently, objectively assessed and declared to be THE ‘truth’. Tricky, that . . . but it also applies to many non-religious fields. Witness, for example, the climate change debate! “We can’t wait for science to prove or disprove our claims – this is too important! We must act NOW!”
Sheesh . . . !!!