#17: On Searching for a Single Source of Truth
Thoughts on Determining What is True and What is Not True
One of the key goals of information science, or information technology, is to organize data in such a way that it becomes usable. This process is called information architecture.
It involves the gathering of the parts of information (raw data) and connecting them into an organized structure. Once the information is organized, it can be analyzed to create wholes of things aka knowledge. Once knowledge, or knowledges, have been created, they then serve as the basis for making sound judgments, or wisdom.
Here’s another way to look at it …
When we take raw data and organize it into information, we are creating context.
When we take information and create knowledge, we are creating meaning.
When we take knowledge and build wisdom, we are creating insight.
Taken in reverse …
the value of wisdom is dependent on the quality of the knowledge,
which is dependent on the quality of the information,
which is dependent on the quality of the data.
Information Architecture
One form of information architecture is called single source of truth (SSOT), or single point of truth (SPOT) architecture, which involves the practice of ensuring every element of data is gathered into one centralized place and then closed off from outside tampering. This speaks to protecting the quality of the data.
Specifically, this practice is called data normalization to a canonical form. The “canon” of data becomes the “master data,” or “master copy,” the single source of truth.
SIDEBAR » A canon is a set of data/texts/compositions accepted as true, correct, and of ultimate authority in a given context. For example, we have the Western canon of literature, the Biblical canon of 66 books, we also have bodies of principles, rules, standards, and norms organized into canons of law, i.e. American law.
The Master Copy
The master data, or master copy, is created by subjecting every data element to a set of formal criteria and rules that include, for example, eliminating redundant and unstructured data. By separating the proverbial “wheat from the chaff,” the master copy consists only of clean data, trustworthy data, reliable data.
The master copy is the thing that is true for every user of that particular data set. It is objectively true because its nature does not change from user to user. The truth relies solely in the object (master data), irrespective of the subject (the user).
Searching for a Single Source of Truth
If you follow me here, you know that I started questioning my sanity last summer after Roe v. Wade was overturned. The utterances that were coming out of people’s mouths - online and off - felt so out of bounds. It was actually gross and I absolutely needed to know more.
It’s as if they’d all cast their common sense aside in search of any truth claim anywhere to support their otherwise seemingly unsupportable positions. Honestly, I was shocked. I really didn’t get it. These were really lovely, ordinarily people who meant well, so why such stridency?
I was also deeply troubled by how little others knew about Roe v. Wade in the first place - and by others, I mean attorneys. We all read the case in law school, and many of us reread it after Dobbs v. Jackson as a refresher, but the collective ignorance was disturbing. Moreover, we also read a case called Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which significantly changed Roe, but stopped shy of overturning it. The entire abortion landscape was very different after Casey, but that didn’t enter the airwaves, aka the social waves.
SIDEBAR » Roe and Casey were gigantic cases of the late 20th century. They’re impact extended far beyond abortion, affecting legal structures around contraception, euthanasia, homosexuality, and, most recently, gay marriage. Their impact was so enormous, in part, because both cases relied on a court-created “right to privacy,” often called the right to “be left alone,” or the right to be “free of government scrutiny” into one’s private beliefs and behavior, which gave the privacy doctrine credibility and authority. Simply put, they relied on a court-created, not Constitutionally prescribed, source of truth that sits on a foundation of logical fallacies and faulty assumptions.
My journey to reverse-engineer the presuppositions, the assumptions, on which the pro-abortion stance rests began in earnest.
SIDEBAR » At the time, I was among those who thought that abortion was horrible, but still believed there are times when it would be really unfair to deny someone access in specific circumstances. Some stories pulled at my heart strings, but most of what I was reading pulled at my head strings, and I didn’t like it.
The Chain of Reasoning
In epistemology, the study of knowledge and ways of knowing, there is what we call the regress argument. The argument says that every proposition, i.e. statement, belief, or declaration, requires justification. And, that every justification requires support.
Here’s an illustration.
If one declares P1 to be true, one must justify why P1 is true, and so on and so forth. As you can see, the regress problem never ends, until it does.
The ending is always the issue!
Regress can only end when we bottom out and ultimately find the single source of truth that requires no further justification or support.
This begs the question …
What is truth?
Well, that depends on one’s theory of truth. This is where it gets interesting.
Three different theories of truth present themselves today.
Correspondence Theory of Truth
Pragmatic Theory of Truth
Functional Theory of Truth
Which theory one relies on will determine which “reality” they live in.
According to Dr. Richard G. Howe, the correspondence theory of truth says that “truth is correspondence to reality, which is to say, a statement is true inasmuch as it aligns with or is in accord with what is actually the case.”
Aristotle weighed in on the issue as well in his work Metaphysics, when he put it this way:
“To say of what is, that it is not, or of what it is not, that it is, is false, while to say of what is, that it is and of what is not, that it is not, is true.”
Dr. Howe explains that the pragmatic theory of truth is what gives rise to the notion of what can be “true for you but not true for me.” The theory claims that a statement is true so long as it’s practical. Obviously, this theory fails to connect truth with reality, rendering it inadequate. Think of it this way, one can’t even explain the pragmatic theory of truth without relying on the correspondence theory of truth to define it.
Finally, the functional theory of truth, also described by Dr. Howe, says that a statement is true “inasmuch as it fulfills the purpose or function that is intended by the one making the statement.” This is akin to someone saying the Bible is true, while also alleging it includes falsehoods. But, because having the Bible be true serves a particular purpose or intention, the statement therefore is true. It’s a “convenient truth.”
—
When I began to unravel the truth claims and underlying assumptions of the pro-choice side of the argument, I quickly learned about these different theories of truth, and the resulting unique “realities” they required to be sustained.
Connecting the dots between theories of truth and the world as it is, not as we wish it be, was a pretty big breakthrough. It also meant that I’d just opened Pandora’s Box and was about to hop on Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride.
It took me some time to find the single source of truth for the pro-abortion argument, which, unsurprisingly, applied to all manner of issues regarding race, class, gender, sexuality, and the related -isms that pit us against each other.
Once I hit the bottom, once I found the master copy, I re-engineered the propositions from the bottom up. That was when I really hit pay dirt - metaphorically speaking. That’s when I realized the situs of the tension point between the various “thought forms” fighting to take up residence in Americans’ minds and where the rubber is meeting the road.
—
My next posts will take you on my voyage of reverse-engineering and reverse-reasoning my way to the single source(s) of truth on which much of our current culture relies … and then explore the logical consequences that flow from them.
To be clear, I’m not an engineer, or a techie, I’m just an information detective. I’m also insatiably curious (to my mom’s chagrin when I was a kid) and find learning to be quite enjoyable, if not maddening at times.
My goal is simply to create context, meaning, and insight into this modern moment by unpacking the truth claims, and the assumptions on which they rest, of the issues that blow our minds every day. Ultimately, my goal is to reveal what I now believe is the single source of truth for ALL things.
Off we go!
xo,
Kelley
October 3, 2023
Perfect