A few weeks ago I decided to read a book that has been on my maybe-I-will-read-it list for awhile.  The book is a college philosophy course text book that one of my sons left at home after he went out on his own.  So I read Relativism Cognitive and Moral edited with introductions by Jack W. Meiland and Michael Krausz.  This book was originally published in 1982 and includes papers written between 1970 and 1980 by a number of academics that are "experts" in philosophy. 

The bottom line of the book is that there is no such thing as absolute truth according to the Relativists.  Each of us (from the perspective of the collective historical and current population of our planet) has our own perspective and definition of truth.  Depending on the culture in which we live or lived or the group of like minded people we associate or associated with on a day to day basis we can create our own definition of truth on almost any topic we wish.  I have to admit that it was hard to read many of the academic papers.  Most of them were really dry, boring and repetitive but each of them contained a few kernels of useful information.  I can't even imagine having to read this stuff as an academic assignment!

It has been a few days since I finished the book and I have been thinking about what to write about it.  One thing that is now easier for me to understand is how different groups of people can take the same basic information and derive completely opposite views of what it means.  If you surround yourself with completely like minded people your definition of truth will be narrowly defined by the group.  If you want to keep an open mind on a wide range of topics it is unlikely that you will ever find a home in a large group that desires a fixed approach to defining what is true on topics of the greatest importance to the group.

It also helped me understand why we have so many issues trying to move forward productively in the US.  The US has incorporated people into its population from all over the world during its history.  The population that exists today is vastly more diverse in many different aspects than it was 50 years ago.  Since many of the diverse groups have a reasonable probability of not agreeing on what is "true", it is very hard for a representative government to create a majority opinion in favor of actions that should be taken based on what is "true".  All of different versions of "truth" have advocates for their version.  And there can be little doubt that our diversity will continue to expand in the future.

At some point the majority of our diverse population is going to have to come together to reestablish what we as Americans believe is the "truth" concerning the meaning of our Constitution and the laws under which we agree to live.  We won't be able to survive and thrive in an environment where we have to ask each person "Which Truth Do You Like?"

I wish everyone a successful 2014!

TPM

Negotiators from the US Senate, controlled by the Democrats, and House of Representatives, controlled by the Republicans, reached a budget deal this week.  The House approved the deal yesterday and the Senate is scheduled to vote on the bill within a few days.  The budget deal has been criticized by a number of leading Conservatives for failing to make significant progress in addressing the long term financial issues facing the US government.  The criticism is justified because the deal doesn't make meaningful progress in solving our long term fiscal issues.

Those of us that want to see meaningful progress on our fiscal issues face a quandary.  Should we pile on the criticism or accept the deal for what it is, a short term path forward.  The bottom line is that the Conservative perspective is the minority view in Congress at this time.  The Senate, as currently constructed, will never agree to the fundamental changes that are required.  President Obama will never agree to the fundamental changes that are required in the current environment.  Therefore, there is no point in criticizing the budget deal.  We must accept the fact that no material fiscal changes can be made unless the Senate becomes much more Conservative after the 2014 elections.  It is more likely that we will have to wait until 2017 when President Obama leaves office. 

The long term problem continues to get worse every day.  The majority of our leaders refuse to address it.  There is not much individual citizens can do other than attempt to protect themselves from the economic damage that will eventually be inflicted by excess government debt and money printing by the Federal Reserve.  Until an economic emergency takes place or the majority of US voters finally see the fiscal light, the US government isn't go to implement the changes that are necessary.

So we need to move forward, accept the situation for what it is and prepare for the future.

TPM

I just finished reading The Untold History of the United States by Oliver Stone and Peter Kuznick which was originally published in 2012.  After reading the book I updated my article Spin, Lies, Conspiracy and Truth, http://www.thepurplemuse.com/id33.html.  I highly recommend the book to anyone that wants to learn more about the history of the decision making and actions of the US government and its leaders beginning from the time of the Spanish-American War through late 2011/early 2012.  The book addresses most, if not all, of the major actions and decisions that led to warfare involving the United States during this period.  It is hard to find a time when the US was not involved in some way in a shooting war or armed conflict during the past 120 years.  Just because a nation isn't fighting doesn't mean it is not participating in another nations battles.  The book also addresses decisions that led to the end of wars, including the decision by President Truman to drop two atomic bombs on Japan.  If the historical scenario presented by the authors is correct, one has to question Truman's motives.

One may not agree with all the opinions expressed by the authors.  However, the facts presented are the facts and deserve a thoughtful review.  The authors also present their own opinions throughout the book.  The authors are clearly antagonistic to the development and maintenance of the US global military empire that has evolved through the actions of all US Presidents and administrations since World War II. Is it really necessary? 

After reading the book one has to ask oneself, "Where is the US headed into the future?"  There is no changing the past.  It is history now.  But hopefully we can learn from our past and prepare ourselves to make honorable fact decisions about the future.  We all need a better understanding of the US untold history.

TPM