Alternative Facts
The Earth was created 10,000 years ago. This is an ‘alternative fact’, period.
As Merriam-Webster deftly pointed out on its Twitter feed, ‘A fact is a piece of information presented as having objective reality’.
https://twitter.com/MerriamWebster/status/823221915171061760
Therefore, no matter what your religious or political beliefs, if you claim the Earth is less than 10,000 years old, you are not grounded in objective reality.
The faith in ‘alternative facts’ allowed within our religious systems has created a dangerous acceptance of an alternative reality in other aspects of our culture. Most notably, of course, politics.
Among liberals, 45% were absolutely certain, while 24% were fairly certain. Nearly 20% of liberals do not believe in God at all.
In another study, regarding climate change, the numbers were quite opposite. Only 18% of conservatives believed that climate change is occurring compared to 68% of liberals.
In other words, over 90% of conservatives are either fairly or absolutely certain of something that is not an objective reality (God).
Conversely, they are only 18% certain in something that, according to climate change scientists, is a scientific certainty based on their evidence, which is comparable to the evidence that smoking causes cancer.
. . . . .
In July, Newt Gingrich argued with the CNN Anchor, Alisyn Camerota, that violent crime is increasing (among other things).
When she corrects him on the point, and replies by noting that violent crime is down, citing FBI Statistics, he replies, “No, that’s your view.” He goes on to say that, “The current view is that liberals have a whole set of statistics…” which does not match what Americans feel.
Within the political arena, there seems to this false assumption, at least on one side of the aisle, that two different sets of facts exist. And not only that they exist, but that they are both capable of being ‘true’. One set of facts for liberals, and another for conservatives. Both of which are equivalent.
. . . . .
This is quite similar, if not identical, to what religion does. It blurs the line between faith and fact, subjective and objective. It creates associations among different sets of ‘facts’ and various religions.
There is one set of ‘facts’ for Christianity, and other sets of ‘facts’ for Islam, Judaism, Hindu, etc.
We are taught that the word of God — OUR particular word of God — is true, and that we must have faith in it, even if others doubt our belief. In fact, especially if others doubt our belief — because that can only be the devil at work!
However, it then allows, encourages even, that people respect another person’s beliefs or ‘facts’. It’s okay to disagree as long as you respect the other person.
While it’s admirable to teach respect for all people, the core process leads to a damaging habit of thought.
. . . . .
My belief is that this false notion arises, at least within the US, largely because of the way people are brought up religiously. The line becomes blurred between what is objective and subjective.
And this should hardly be surprising, as people may spend 30% more of their days in their lifetime practicing religion than they do learning about truly objective reality.
I hear many religious people say that the country, the world perhaps, is losing its religious, or moral, values.
But judging by the way alternative facts are repeatedly promoted within religions, I would disagree. It seems the world is now, more than ever, willing to follow their lead.
