The Death of Truth

The Death of Truth
by Dissonant Hermit

Today there is much talk, especially in schools, about how can we trust the tons of information that exists in society today. Hours upon hours are spent discussing validity and reliability of information. Pages of text are being published every day on the topic of trusting information sources and evaluating right from wrong. In schools, the debates rage on about what sources schools can or should use and which should not be allowed. Interestingly enough, there are schools that block sites strictly because individuals locally have deemed the site “too untrustworthy for students to use” (Wikipedia anyone?)  Many fret over a perceived dilemma that with increased access to information, our children need even more skills to determine the worth and validity of that information. This anxiety is completely misplaced. Instead of concentrating on increased access, too many resources or any perceived need for more accurate information, we should be in uproar about the almost complete collapse of inquiry, discovery and discussion in our institutions and lack of family structures that support learning!

Lets go back a few decades before all this information age started up. Children would learn the “truth” of something from a very limited subset. Truth would come from something they heard from others (parents, teachers, church, law enforcement, friends...) or something they experimented with and found some limited subset of responses to. For instance, was it really true that giving a sea gull an anti acid would blow the bird up? Really? As in KaBoom? The child may have heard that from a friend. The child did not cross check facts with the world, he or she simply did one of two things. They checked with parents or family members to either verify or disprove this theory or the child smuggled some Tums to launch some birds into feathery masses. That’s it! Research methods that got people capable of landing on the moon and all it took was someone to talk to and an eagerness for self discovery or verification. Sure, mom and dad probably had no clue about half the questions that were asked them, but they shared their understanding and belief around almost any given topic (sex was still tricky.... thank goodness for the Internet now on that one). Today, if a parent is even around when a child has a question, many parents are afraid to give kids incorrect information rather than an honest, “I am not sure, but I think.... maybe we could check this out by ....” Many parents simply differ to some “authority” such as “I don’t know, go ask your teachers at school.” Not only does the child get denied any insight into the inquiry processes adults may use, the message received from the parents above is “We have important things to do and not enough time to deal with this. Why don’t you get someone else to deal with this that knows more than I do.” Wow! Is the isolation from our parents creating a fear in our children to ask opinions or accept that there may be more than one right answer?

Even if the child brings the question up in school with those in “authority”, he or she may often be dismissed as teachers have much to do and very little time for side dalliances. Again, the message is that inquiry is a waste of everyone’s time, and since no one has time for your questions why bother coming up with questions. Out side and inside of school, our time demands and pace of life are hindering the growth and mental development of our children as childhood inquiry continues to wither.  

Back in time, my parents may have said X and your parents said Y. We may have fought about it and maybe even a bloodied eye or some flat tires may be involved in the negotiations. In the end, the desire to find out who was right was right up there with the adrenalin from our heated debate. Maybe it was just ego, but we had a reason to know something. “I’ll show you who’s right...” Today, in the views of many youth, learning in school is just more crap that will be on some test somewhere.

So, the information processing in the past may have been limited to a child because there were so few sources of “reliable” information available. How does the student’s validation of any data in that limited environment compare with the ability students have now to validate information? That will depend on how much filtering adults do to get in the way of multiple points of view AND it will depend on how much of a forum the child has to discuss possibilities. Humans are social. Almost every study on human behavior hints or references that social dependency inherent in people at most any age. We learn by discussing, not memorizing useless facts to make the grade. Ironically, so many schools deny students electronic means to communicate with each other, professionals out in the “real world”, or even students in other cultures unless adults set it up in a sterile environment where nothing terribly radical could happen. I know schools are under incredible pressures from a sue happy culture that has pushed family liabilities into our educational domain, so I understand and can defend some of the actions education takes to try to defend itself. While schools continue to “protect” what students may or may not learn or do, our children are further disabled in their ability to inquire. Why bother, the school will filter it all out for us anyway and tell us what we have to do.

In spite of the lack of social discourse outlets for students’ inquiries and discoveries, the Internet and it’s ever increasing set of resources provide almost a counter weight that should give people hope that inquiry and the pursuit of truth can survive.

Instead of a music student waiting to hear from some local adult the merits of their musical potential, the student can use their spirit of experimentation and post Internet samples of their work and learn from those interested. Oh, but kids can’t get on those sites in school. Nor can they even check on feedback from those sources while in school. Regardless of the lack of access for at least 6 hours of their day, some students persist. They get feedback after school on what they do right and wrong and those students that wish to succeed continue working with their online resources to learn, publish and rework their craft. Today, more than any other time in history, people are able to self publish or get job offers from companies without having to step foot in the debt agencies we call colleges. People are getting hired on the Internet because of what they can do, not based on paperwork that shows they paid X amount to put in Y seat time to pass some tests.

The history student yearning to find out how the British recorded history concerning the American revolution may be ecstatic to find British accounts available, possibly even at school. The student’s excitement soon run into conflicts when he or she tries to share those different accounts with some school authorities that feel the test or a textbook has X interpretation so discussions about Y and Z will only confuse children. Brainwashing them to one set of interpretations is so much easier than dealing with the processing of perspectives and alternative points of view.

In yet another hope, a student wants to connect with cultures over half a world away. The student researches at home, usually though their social network, to find a school to connect with. This school may operate in time zones 10 hours away. These resources are brought to a teacher (if the child can even figure out which teachers might be most receptive to hear their inquiry) to possibly find an adult supporter. Even if the child is lucky enough to find a teacher that supports this inquiry, the excuses start up at many levels. Administrators may question why students are staying after school to “chat” with others. Parents may complain that their child is staying after school for education because the time variance is inconvenient to the parent’s transportation schedule. Teachers, even the one the child may have found supportive, now realize that supporting this inquiry will fall only on the teacher.  Taking on yet another responsibility outside of school will tax workers that already put in tons of over time (most teachers do) without any fiscal compensation. The student is at best told to find a school that is closer, which limits the cultural exposure the child was after. The student begrudgingly finds a school within the same timezone only to run into time conflicts in the school day with schedules or access to hardware or rooms. After such a good idea comes in to “the system” the child drops the inquiry feeling again that “real learning” is not something they can do with school.

One might argue that the three scenarios presented above are not realistic, authentic or practical. Each one is a summary of a story students have shared with me concerning their frustration with their lack of learning in school. The student’s truth is in what they experience and from the discussions with those they can contact. That truth has not changed. The importance of experience and freedom to discuss or explore with others is just as essential today as it was generations ago. Instead, our text book publishers and their standardized tests are trying to teach our kids “the truth”. A truth that students question the relevance of so often, because of the deficiencies in inquiry, discovery and discussion in their lives. You want kids to know truth? Let them explore, experiment and discuss with more than a few assigned people those issues that are so important for our kids to learn. Parents, saying you don’t know is a big step, but sharing what you think and why you would guess that is so vital to your child learning how to learn. Your sharing how you think and process the unknown can be worth so much more than any textbook learning your child gets at school. Children respect adults that share the knowledge of how we learn. Sharing how we think and deal with inquiry, may feel embarrassing or awkward, but it is so vital to model real learning and inquiry for our youth. Heck, we might even end up with a population that has a majority of free thinkers rather than a flock of followers that have been so subjugated that the majority have faith that someone in charge will give them all the answers they need and tell them what they should believe.