You are here

Towards articulation of a "post-truth table"?


Radical Disaffection Engendered by Elitist Groupthink? (Part #7)


[Parts: First | Prev | Last | All] [Visuals] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]


Truth table: To the extent that the conventional relevance of truth has now been called into question in the political arena at least, and the advertising process more generally, there is a case for considering the nature of a "post-truth table" in the light of the apparent limitations of the truth table. As understood in mathematics, this sets out the functional values of logical expressions on each of their functional arguments. In particular, truth tables can be used to show whether a propositional expression is true for all legitimate input values, that is, logically valid. [For the sake of clarity, it is somewhat ironic that the work of Emil Leon Post on propositional logic now gives rise to confusion with regard to any reference to a "Post truth table"; this is also evident from references to its parallel invention by Ludwig Wittgenstein -- hence the confusing implications of reference to a "Wittgenstein-Post truth table"].

Further clarification regarding the origins of "post-truth" is provided by (The Surprising Origins of 'Post-truth' -- and how it was spawned by the liberal left, The Conversation, 18 November 2016):

More than 30 years ago, academics started to discredit "truth" as one of the "grand narratives" which clever people could no longer bring themselves to believe in. Instead of "the truth", which was to be rejected as naive and/or repressive, a new intellectual orthodoxy permitted only "truths" -- always plural, frequently personalised, inevitably relativised. Under the terms of this outlook, all claims on truth are relative to the particular person making them; there is no position outside our own particulars from which to establish universal truth.

What now appears to be required is an extension of the truth-table is to encompass the emerging reality that "THEM" are understood (by "US") to be misrepresenting the truth (if not lying), especially about "US" -- whether deliberately or inadvertently. This is complemented by the understanding by "THEM" that "US" is misrepresenting the truth (if not lying), especially about "THEM" -- again, whether deliberately or inadvertently. The situation is rendered more complex to the extent that if either US or THEM has the power to misrepresent (or lie), it becomes impossible for either to prove incontrovertibly that they are not. This is especially problematic for any authority, whether a government, a corporation, a religion, or any institutionalised belief system. Authoritative declarations of truth can then only be understood as assertions of "fiat realities", analogous to the creation of fiat money.

"Fake news": There is a long-standing concern with misinformation and disinformation which can take a variety of forms, some of it considered highly appropriate to deception of the enemy and as propaganda in war time. It is a natural aspect of advertising, notably as puffery. Especially insidious is the deliberate selective presentation of information -- creating filter bubbles -- such as to reinforce and orient patterns of behaviour, of which grooming the gullible is the most obvious example (Eli Pariser, The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You, 2011). A recent report determined that some 82% of middle-schoolers could not distinguish between an advertisement labeled "sponsored content" and a real news story (A Most Students Don't Know When News Is Fake, Stanford Study Finds, The Wall Street Journal, 21 November 2016).

A variant notably featured with respect to the miss-selling of mortgages which created the vulnerability enabling the sub-prime crisis. Partly as a consequence of the negative campaigning in the US presidential election, new concerns have been expressed about "fake news" and its elimination (How Fake News Goes Viral: A Case Study, The New York Times, 20 November 2016; Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg Outlines Projects to Reduce Fake News, Live Science, 21 November 2016; 12 Fake News Stories from the Mainstream Media, Breitbart, 22 November 2016).

The question for Michel Chossudovsky is Who is Behind "Fake News"?:

The mainstream corporate media is desperate. They want to suppress independent and alternative online media, which they categorize as "fake news". Readers on social media are warned not to go onto certain sites. Our analysis confirms that the mainstream media are routinely involved in distorting the facts and turning realities upside down. (Mainstream Media Use Fake Videos and Images, Global Research, 24 November 2016)

As an extension of the strategic use of disinformation, there is the far more problematic use of "false flag" operations. These are covert operations that are designed to deceive in such a way that the operations appear as though they are being carried out by entities, groups, or nations other than those who actually planned and executed them. It necessarily far from clear what actions attributed to "terrorists" may be more correctly attributed to entities seeking to justify security operation or military intervention against those framed as terrorists. The Wikipedia description of false flag operations notes the extent to which these may be used to justify the declaration of war.

Whilst the implication is that fake news is essentially problematic, notably with respect to any concerns dependent on accuracy and objectivity, there is another form of misinformation which is especially well-intentioned (in contrast to that seeking to misguide, exploit or harm). This is evident in the conventions of political correctness, etiquette, empowerment discourse, and interaction with the vulnerable -- possibly to enhance group cohesion through reinforcing confirmation bias. Some forms of lying (notably flattery) are valuable in developing and sustaining social relationships which would otherwise be threatened or undermined. It remains a matter of controversy as to when frankness is appropriate or harmful. Governance claim the need to misinform regarding some issues in order not to engender panic.

A further dimension is obvious in the deliberate omission of information on matters which would raise unwelcome questions or reactions -- as is evident in discourse within a family in which some things are said by some, and omitted in the presence of others. Hence the issue of the "unsaid" noted above. Initiatives undertaken to eradicate fake news can clearly be conceived as a means of removing unwelcome news -- namely as a form of censorship.

Readily forgotten is the sense in which "fiction" is necessarily "fake" -- as with many stories. As with respect to sponsored advertisments, there is then the issue of the capacity to distinguish fact from fiction, notably in the light of the earlier articulation of "truthiness" (Howard Wainer, Truth or Truthiness: distinguishing fact from fiction by learning to think like a data scientist, 2015; Howard Gardner, Truth, Beauty, and Goodness Reframed: educating for the virtues in the Age of Truthiness and Twitter, 2012).Linda Starr, Fact, Fiction, or Opinion? Evaluating Online Information, Education World, 2009).

The issue is especially important when the fiction is developed as a means of grooming the population (Children Exposed To Religion Have Difficulty Distinguishing Fact From Fiction, Study Finds, The Huffington Post, 21 July 2014; Hollywood and the Pentagon: a relationship of mutual exploitation, Al Jazeera, 29 January 2014; 11 Hollywood/Pentagon propaganda films released since 2001, The Screeching Kettle, 11 January 2015).

Some form of post-truth table would be helpful in clarifying this variety rather promoting the illusion that there is a possibility of eliminating inaccurate news. A particularly difficulty is associated with information which may be presented and sincerely upheld as truth today, only to be proved to be misleading and inaccurate tomorrow. This is especially evident in those assertions of science for which no indication is provided as to their hypothetical nature.

Encoding patterns: Arguably, as a prelude to any such exercise, it could be suggested that the interplay between Democrats and Republicans, majority and minority, and right and wrong, could benefit from insight into the encoding of patterns of binary distinctions offered by the I Ching (Transformation Metaphors derived experimentally from the Chinese Book of Changes, 1997).

In that sense those favouring Trump, and populist leaders elsewhere, are opposing the previously dominant values seen to be characterized in practice by "excessive yin" and "insufficient yang". The nationalist agendas, and all that is naturally held to be disagreeable about them from a yin perspective, could then be understood as a countervailing measure of yang. This is most evident in the current challenge to a variety of unconstrained humanitarian responses (influx of asylum seekers, sexual freedom, etc). The dynamic could be otherwise framed as the eternal battle between the headless hearts (aka the "bleeding hearts") and the heartless heads.

Some indication as to how such a "post-truth table" might be elaborated is offered separately (Discovering Richer Patterns of Comprehension to Reframe Polarization, 1998; Changing Patterns using Transformation Pathways: exploring "camp-us" inspiration by an alien world view as a metaphor, 2015 ). This is consistent with the sense in which the binary framing currently challenged embodies the values of allopathy to the exclusion of those embodied by homeopathy, as argued separately (Remedies to Global Crisis: "Allopathic" or "Homeopathic"? Metaphorical complementarity of "conventional" and "alternative" models, 2009).

The pattern in the exercise of 1998 might then be adapted according to the following structure in which, at each stage (with the exception of the first) a "post-truth" reframing is variously made of the conditions at the previous stage. This is indicated by colouring an "overview line" (corresponding to a "meta-perspective") differently from that used in the black/white pattern of the traditional encoding.

2-fold comprehension


No higher-order perspective from which to perceive, evaluate or comment on the above distinction

4-fold comprehension
(engendered by emergence of a higher-order meta-perspective on the above)

Perception / Evaluation / Overview
of underlying condition (1-line encoding above)
  Perception / Evaluation / Overview
of underlying condition (1-line encoding above)
of Self ( positive/uncritical,
self-appreciation)
of Self by Other
(negative/critical)
  of Self by Other
(negative/critical)
of Self ( positive/uncritical,
self-appreciation)
Got act together; everything under control Undemocratic, unjustified dominance; dictatorship Undemocratic, unjustified dominance Got act together; everything under control; law and order
(appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added)
(appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added)
(appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added)   (appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added)

Text for the above set of patterns could be readily derived from the distinctions made between openness and closure, variously understood as "good" or "bad".

8-fold comprehension
(engendered by emergence of a higher-order meta-perspective on the above)

Perception / Evaluation / Overview
of underlying condition (2-line encoding above)
  Perception / Evaluation / Overview
of underlying condition (2-line encoding above)
of Self ( positive/uncritical) of Other (negative/critical)   of Other (negative/critical) of Self ( positive/uncritical)
(appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added)
(appropriate text to be added)
(appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added)
(appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added)
(appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added)
(appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added)
(appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added)
(appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added)
(appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added)
(appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added) (appropriate text to be added)

Text for the above set of patterns could be adapted from sets of distinctions made by authors such as
Magoroh Maruyama, Geert Hofstede, Will McWhinney, Stephen Pepper, Mary Douglas, Howard Gardner, W, T, Jones and Emmanuel Todd, as discussed separately (Systems of Categories Distinguishing Cultural Biases, 1993).

Orders of cybernetic feedback: As suggested by the 1998 exercise, this approach could be extended to 16-fold comprehension, to 32-fold comprehension, and to the 64-fold comprehension encoded by the complete I Ching pattern. Of particular interest is the implication that the distinctively coloured oversight line is then indicative of a meta-reflection consistent with arguments for recognition of various cybernetic orders of feedback: 1st order (4-fold), 2nd order (8-fold), 3rd (16-fold), 4th (32-fold), 5th (64-fold) (cf. Maurice Yolles and Gerhard Fink, Generic Agency Theory, Cybernetic Orders and New Paradigms, Kybernetes, 2015).

The arguments of the latter build on those initially elaborated for a viable system model by Stafford Beer (Beyond Dispute: the invention of team syntegrity, 1994).

Ternary patterns: In terms of traditional Chinese thinking, rather than trigrams, any distinguishing line (highlighted above) merits consideration in the light of another encoding using tetragrams (or quadgrams) as in the T'ai Hsüan Ching, as discussed separately (Strategic Patterns in terms of Knowing, Feeling and Action, 2008). Given the current preoccupation with the elusive implications of post-truth politics, the subtlety of such traditional conceptual tools merits a degree of attention -- especially in the light of the importance accorded to them with respect to the governance of China over millennia.

In that tradition the binary representation (broken/unbroken line) is augmented by a third form (twice broken), thereby giving rise to the quadgram encoding. Appropriate to the post-truth challenge, this is associated with the "human". In contemporary logic such a pattern is associated with use of a ternary numeral system (Triangulation of Incommensurable Concepts for Global Configuration, 2011).

Calculus for self-reference: These concerns recall current interest in meta-logic and the calculus of indications, stimulated by the seminal arguments of George Spencer Brown (Laws of Form, 1969), developed as a calculus of indications by Francisco Varela (The Extended Calculus of Indications interpreted as a three-valued logic, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 20, 1979, 1; A Calculus for Self-reference, International Journal of General Systems, 2, 1975, pp. 15-24) and by Louis Kauffman (Virtual Logic: symbolic logic and the calculus of indications, Cybernetics and Human Knowing, 5, 1998, 3, pp. 63-70).

This has been variously explored by Dirk Baecker (A Calculus for Autopoiesis, 2013) and by Douglas Flemons (Completing Distinctions, 1991)

Boundedness: openness vs. closure: The abstract preoccupations with logic readily obscure its implications for recognition of boundaries and distinctions (in the Laws of Form, for example). As noted above, clarification of the 4-fold pattern lends itself to articulation in terms of perception of openness and closure as good or bad -- and unquestionably so.

Arguably this pattern is fundamental to the distinction between Democrats and Republicans, or between progressives and conservatives more generally. It is evident in preferences in the debate on free trade versus protectionism, globalization versus nationalism, and on the freedoms and constraints of sexual behaviour (exemplified in clothing coverage).

The contrasting preferences are usefully related to the concerns that they imply with respect to excessive closure or openness in a context where arguments are too readily made that global society cannot have enough openness, or that community identity can only be cultivated through a high order of closure. The 4-fold pattern is then:

  Closure Openness
Good/Right boundary protection free movement
Bad/Wrong excessive restrictions unconstrained freedom

Understood in such general terms, relevant authors include Orrin Klapp (Opening and Closing: strategies of information adaptation in society, 1978), Hilary Lawson (Closure: a short history of everything, 2002) and Eric S. Raymond (The Cathedral and the Bazaar, 1999).

Fundamental issues are evident in the contrast between the promotion of "yes" (and agreement) in contrast with "no" (and disagreement), as characteristic of other initiatives (Roger Fisher and William L. Ury, Getting to Yes: negotiating agreement without giving in, 1991; Nikki Martinez, Learning to Say 'No', The Huffington Post, 23 February 2016; Ruchika Agarwal and Joe Avella, Here is why you should learn to say no, Business Insider, 8 February 2016).

Negotiating table for "post-truth": The table metaphor is valuable because of its association with the conventional negotiating table at which -- supposedly -- truth might be evident. It is there that participants "put their cards on the table" -- ideally face-up. The implied symbolish itself merits consideration (Radical Localization in a Global Systemic Context: distinguishing normality using playing card suits as a pattern language, 2015).

The difficulty is that, as in many card games, the face of the card may not be evident. Deception may be a key strategy, as in poker. What might be the dynamics around a negotiating table capable of encompassing post-truth? One clue, as separately discussed, is offered by the surprise inherent in Knight's move thinking.

Beyond the table metaphor: Also of potential relevance is the possibility that the paradoxical contradictions of post-truth may call for representation in terms of a geometry distinct from a "table" and the oversimplification of relations between conditions that it may imply. In his work on syntegrity, Stafford Beer attached significance to the icosahedron understood in terms of the dynamics of tensegrity. There is a possibility of mapping the distinctions implied by the 64 I Ching hexagrams onto the toroidal drilled truncated cube (Proof of concept: use of drilled truncated cube as a mapping framework for 64 elements, 2015).

As with the invisibility of one part of the globe from another, a sphere offers indications (Spherical Accounting: using geometry to embody developmental integrity, 2004). Integrating change can be associated with the helix (Visualization in 3D of Dynamics of Toroidal Helical Coils: in quest of optimum designs for a Concordian Mandala, 2016).

Tao of "Us" and "Them"
animation of a 4D Klein bottle usefully explored as a 2D rendering
(adapted from Snoring of The Other: a politically relevant psycho-spiritual metaphor? 2006)
Animation of Tao of "Us" and "Them"

[Parts: First | Prev | Last | All] [Visuals] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]