The three lies
We only get one chance to live in the body we currently inhabit, and we are on a timer as well. Once we are born, we have senses, intelligence etc to understand the state of “reality” around us. We are already born into a complex physical world and a complex civilisation. So for us, the job of our lives is to “de-construct” this complex world into simple concepts that we can determine as indisputable, or truths. The worst thing, in my view, is to not get a chance to fully understand the state of “reality” around us.
The way we understand the “truths” is really by defining a model and then testing is rigorously. For example, you want to deconstruct how water converts into steam when you apply heat. You create a mental model which states that water particles are bonded together, and when you apply heat, they absorb the heat and then break those bonds. This seems to be a reasonable deconstruction of the observed phenomenon that you can test with other materials as well. “Testing” of models that explain physical reality seems much more do-able. We can also test conceptual models that are strictly rational and find relations between concepts (mathematics). Lot of the physical world can be explained by these rational ideas of distance and time and energy.
But we also live in a world where there are other “beings” and there are certain phenomena that govern our lives in the realm of co-operating with other beings — let’s call it society. Since there are is a multitude of beings around us, we have created complex models and rules of engagement. These models do one thing — identify a place for everyone in society. The way people interpret these models, is through dissemination (people teaching each other). When we are young, we are taught these rules of engagement and they determine how we live our lives.
Unlike the physical world, these models are purely conceptual and their only goal is to aid co-operation (that is ensure people follow a certain “decorum”). The problem with this is that certain people enjoy lots more freedom under these models than others, and then these models are used not for co-operation but coercion. These models are in that sense disingenuous — they work because there is an element of deception in them. There are three main deceptions that I can see in the way society is structured around us.
Let me call it the three lies.
The first lie: Religion
The foundational principle of religion is the presence of a “higher power” that controls our destiny and needs to be “worshipped” in a particular way. This higher power has published a set of rules or laws that need to be followed, including regular praise of the “higher power” (so that you don’t forget). People who follow these rules are higher in the hierarchy than those who don’t. The purpose is to bring some standardisation in the behaviour of people so that their behaviour becomes predictable, and because there is predictable behaviour, you can somehow control outcomes.
The first problem with religion is that these rules are open to interpretation, hence there is always a “clergy” whose job is to interpret these rules. Second, these rules are considered to the “literal word” of the “higher power”, with some testimonies recorded in ancient times, without any verification. This system became so powerful that it has shaped societies for centuries, organising people, controlling their lives and the killing done in the name of the “higher power”.
People who start questioning the evidence behind these are ridiculed, excluded socially and dog-whistled. Most people who dig deep enough, using their own intelligence, realise that there is no real evidence behind these so called “rules” that they truly represent a “higher power” if at all. Most people with certain level of inquiry can immediately call the bluff. This is the easiest lie to decipher.
The second lie: Materialism
The religious structures ruled the medieval world, but then they were replaced by something more powerful — Materialism. This came about due to the rise of technology (first sea faring and ship building) and then the rise of mercantilism. Humans have certain fundamental needs — safety, pleasure, respect, sophistication etc. These are hard wired biologically and we are instinctively designed to desire these. Most of these are what are “material needs”. Our need for safety wants us to live in impregnable housing, need for pleasure makes us by luxury, need for respect makes us acquire status symbols. In medieval times, because these material needs were so scarce, most people did not gravitate towards them.
As we started building better and better understanding of the physical world, we started controlling it to fulfil our material needs. We controlled energy and directed it to do work for us. We created complex systems to convert energy to work called “machines”. Once machines became common, more and more people started to focus on satisfying their material needs. But some needs are insatiable. Like the need to be a part of the “elite”. Once owning a car was a status symbol, then it became owing a luxury car. There was hardly any difference other than one was a more powerful symbol of status.
This “system” of acquiring more and more material needs has become the core of our society today. Our systems of education are all driven towards materialism. While materialism has a tangible benefit of making us live longer and happier lives, it has also come at a cost. The system of capital which underpins the materialist expansion is highly discriminatory to those who have access to capital than those who have talent. It has made us all think like “traders”. We trade our time for money and money for time. It does not matter if you acquire capital by luck or by smarts. As long as you have capital, you can buy anything else.
This insatiable need for material has left us unhappy and insecure. Most of us are much more materially happy than we think, but yet we keep desiring more. This is the second lie. More materialism won’t make your happier. At some point you need to quit the treadmill, but you won’t know when.
The third lie: Moral righteousness
Morality in itself is not a problem. Morality is this urge to do the “right thing”. The question is always, who decides what is the “right thing” to be done. If you go deeper into this question, you will realise that the right thing is what will lead to a positive outcome for most people, but its not simple, because the hardest thing is to “predict” what the outcome will be. For example, it might be better for everyone if we remove private property and equality distribute wealth, but then it would mean that no-one will put “effort” into creating products and services, because some people will then just enjoy the fruits of someone’s labour. The fact is that these things are hard to predict. Human societies are complex systems and sometimes it is almost impossible to predict what will happen if you do something.
Hence the idea that only some people know what is “right” is the fallacy of morality. All humans are moral creatures, because they want to survive and prosper themselves and are deeply wired to make that happen. People who think differently about what is to be done are not necessarily immoral. Sometimes, unwittingly our moral behaviour ends up doing more damage than good. For example, we may refrain from being honest because we think hurting people is immoral, but then that makes people manipulative. Now you might turn around and say, were the Nazis moral? The question needs to be answered in the context of their reality. In their own warped sense of the world, they were doing the right thing. People in other countries did not agree and defeated them. The question of who is right was decided by a war.
The only way to decide who is right, is by a competition of ideas and letting the best idea win, not by one set of people asserting their morality just on basis of the fact that they insist they are more moral. The only way to find out what is the “right” thing to do is to allow people to think freely and debate their principles. Anyone who says “debate is a bad thing” is essentially saying “I am right and you are wrong”
—
Ultimately all the three lies cover the real ideas behind them — philosophy behind religion, well-being behind materialism and freedom to do the right thing behind moral righteousness. I argue that these are truer ideas than the lies that are generally promoted on their behalf.
