--- **Reality is like an opinion, everybody has one, and they're all different.** On Sun, 7 Feb 1999 12:17:27 Deron Stewart wrote:
>A thought related to the "skeptic's conundrum"...
>
>What if the truth is ugly?
>
>What evidence is there that beauty is less important than truth? If that
>evidence is lacking, there is no rational basis for believing ugly truths
>at the expense of beautiful lies.
>
>It is probably no coincidence that the young and healthy are the most
>attracted to the idea of unalloyed truth...(and unalloyed Ayn Rand)
>
>What if the truth is useless?
>What if the truth is boring?
>
>Truth, yes. Truth at all costs, no.
>
>Deron
>
>(btw, how many people here have read Kurt Vonnegut's _Cat's Cradle_? That
>should be required reading for the list in general, and this thread in
>particular...)
>
>___
My thought is, what if people don't want to know the truth. When I started reading about Memes, my thought was, that by introducing counter-ideas, in a structured (and rather manipulative) way, as the Machine of our society has done, could we not help to change society, in some fashion. The main reason for this, is the observation that, most often times, people DONT WANT TO CHANGE. They would rather be stuck in patterns of exsistence, fueled by past preconceptions, because changing is just too hard for them to fathom. Throughout history, sudden change and upheaval have led to chaos, and change that, unless it was rammed down the throats of the masses involved, was not accepted easily. By introduction of subtlety, the way that Advertising, Marketing, (aka mass manipulation and mind control) have done, things could be changed. People find the truth hard to take. In the case of skeptics, "their" truth is widely different than the truth of the "true believer", who goes more on faith. Time will tell, but, (pardon the pun) truth be told, people don't usually want to change unless they want to, or unless they are MADE to want to. Thanks, G Angelfire for your free web-based e-mail. http://www.angelfire.com