The Truth and the Truth of Lies

Ryan Tedder, the singer/songwriter behind One Republic admitted in an interview that the meaning of this song is the question: do you want to hear big truths about life, or do you want to hear what will make you feel good at the end of the day?

Sometimes the truth is what we need to know, or think we need to know.
Sometimes we don't want to know the truth, we just want to be happy.

If we are constructors of our own realities and everything that matters to us, then I can see a need for both: sometimes we want to be told lies because it makes more sense, but other times we want to know the truth, because it helps us progress and find closure.
Then again... only knowing the happy lies can bring us as much closure as the truth can


It's an odd balance.





I've been working on a project recently about the human experience known as life. We know we exist because we can think, as one philosopher put it. But how do we choose what to think about? Aren't there triggers that prompt our thoughts? And how do we know that we are alive and not dead while we are thinking?

I don't wish to spoil the project right now, but let me just say that it pertains to empiricism, constructionism, human relationships, the power of thought, positive thinking, the human condition, and human emotions.

The project, which I hope to turn into a 90 min documentary or art-film, begs the question: Are the feelings I feel important, even if they are not based on reality? And I would argue that yes, everything we feel, everything that we experience and perceive, they are important to us, and not just to us individually, but they are important to the progression of mankind because of their triggering effect in other peoples' lives.

To live is to experience as much as to think is to exist. I know I am still alive because I am still experiencing things.

Whether you are awake or dreaming, the experience you are having IS relevant to your future. Modern psychological science is slowly catching up to that statement of truth. You have the ability to live lifetimes in your dreams--a place where memories and symbols collide. Some people find truth in their dreams that they could not find in reality. Our minds are intricate and complex.

Tedder exposed something deep and truthful that I can really relate to:
Is it better for me to focus on the truth, on the things that are "profound" and eternal?
Or is it better for me to focus on telling people the things they want to hear, the things they need to hear, even if those things are not the truth, even if those things are false? Should I endorse a make believe life in which the people are happy so long as they can maintain that reality, or should I endorse a very real life in which people know the way the world works and how humans work, but are happy only when their situations are happy and are sad when they are truly sad situations? --This all ties back to how truth is subjective.

Right now I'm struggling to know which is better, and honestly I'd prefer a world in which both co-exist in harmony: a place where people can talk about the truth and not fear it, not shy from it, not run from it, and yet not be condemned by it but instead embrace it, as well as in that same place the possibility of living in a fantasy and choosing to ignore everything that is wrong, everything that is bad. I would love to live in a world where even though the truth may be known, no one chooses to follow it because it makes their lives more difficult and more harsh.

The problem is... it's a very lonely place. Because the moment that you start clinging to the truth, people want to follow the truth and only the truth, they want to live by the truth and be condemned by the truth because at least their lives would be constant. People who want the truth don't want to be lied to, no matter how much better it could make their lives. They especially don't want to lie to themselves, even if it could improve their attitude and perspective of life. But, people who live in a fantasy, they want to remain there, it is their place, it is their home, and they will accept whatever illogical fallacies can keep them there. They will justify their behavior, they will disguise the truth as lies and they will ignore the truth because they are afraid it will condemn them.

You see--there is no middle ground. And because there is no middle ground, there is no one there. No one who would agree with me that there is a possibility for a wonderful life in which truth and lies co-exist. That is because morals and ethics always come into play. Is it okay to lie to your family about your discovery that you have cancer, if it means that the chemo therapy would pull your family apart? Would it not be better to keep the cancer a secret to your family and to die the natural way than to have them argue with you about whether you should prolong your life? Personally, I would not judge anyone who took that route. However, there will always be someone to argue that those conflicts between family are necessary; that somehow they make the family grow closer together, and they reveal more truth or the way that life SHOULD be. But my argument is again: if the family was comfortable with knowing the truth, and everyone in the family embraced it and didn't allow it to affect them, then wouldn't THAT bring them closer together, wouldn't THAT make them have a stronger bond?
You see, it isn't the conflict that strengthens the bond, it is the acceptance that strengthens the bond. But you can also choose to accept a lie as truth and to act on it as though it were truth and YOU as well as everyone who believes it with you, are perfectly fine. Who is lying, the Communist or the Democracist, when they claim their government type is the best type of government?

The reason why I would be so accepting of this is because I know both the truth and the truth of lies.

I have observed an interesting phenomenon--I say phenomenon but really, knowing what I know, there is nothing phenomenal about it, it simply is, it's a truth: sometimes people are held together because they have gone against the grain, sometimes people are held together because they have gone with the grain together. For example: Jesse James and Frank James had a strong brotherly bond because they engaged in outlaw acts, but tennis players build brotherly bonds together when they compete for championships and follow all of the rules. Are they not the same bond manifested in different ways?


I suppose all that I ask out of life is that I find someone--a female (for several obvious reasons)--who desires to live a life of fantasy in which we both know the full truth and are thankful for it, but only use it to capture us when our fantasies are inadequate.

I don't want a life full of truth, or a life full of fantasy, but I do want a companion on my journey who can help me and I can help her live the fantasy or live the truth when one or the other is necessary.