The Reality Behind Falsity Lito Mendoza Velasco Lesson-Driven Perspective [email protected] Relatively, whatever does not conform with the previously accepted maxim or reality is leading to falsity. Falsity, in this case, is the rejection of the truth or the just the negation of what is Right. In the academe, the False statement is merely the refutation of the opposite. Writing either T or F on your Test Paper that does not jibe with the Truth in the mind of your professor would mean a failure to get the right answer, and therefore, tantamount to a failing grade. And in the offices and any other licensing institutions, whoever tampered the existing documents pertaining the factual truth is committing the case as the falsification of the legal documents. In the workplace, try not to perform your task and you would surely be castigated for not abiding with your job description. Try not to please your bosses and you would certainly be reprimanded. In these scenarios, truth are two-sided: The truth and not the truth. If A is true; then, B is False and vise versa. Thus, there are two opposing realities. Both of them are truth-bearing realities. There is even a reality behind falsity. That, it is true that the other is wrong as the action being taken is not accorded to the standard maxim or norm. Nevertheless, the other is true because he is the boss. This truth is what we called authoritative truth--dictatorial. On the other hand, in Logic, Statistics, metaphysics, and any Scientology, whatever that cannot be met by the naked eyes can always be questioned and therefore one may ask for the validity of the gathered facts through or by the presentation of the vital evidences to prove its credibility: Esse est percipe--To be is to be perceived. However, Can the truth always require to be perceived and investigated in order to exist? Obviously, the answer is no. The quantity and quality of the truth can only be measured depending upon the capacity of the perceiver to comprehend. It also depends on the knowers interest and desire on the matter. Demography can prove it. Objectively, the Truth per se, can exist independently of our mind. Its existence, therefore, doesnt have to be known, investigated and proven in order to exist; i.e., the ontological validity of truth. The Moral as well as Legal Leading Principle: The truth is prevailing. How true is it? When is it true? Can we speak of the truth and nothing but the truth without speaking about its contrary? Indeed, whatever exist, exists with a purpose. Wow, purpose-driven! But, what is the motive? Have you tried drawing-out the truth by conducting a survey; have you attended and listened attentively to the Court-Hearings-and-Proceedings? Have you been to the prison cells and tried to conduct an interview with more than a half of the prisoners population? Isnt it true that real criminals are at large and continuously committing crime? Now, granting that there are a few (influential) real culprits that have been sentenced to serve the verdict; Isnt it true that these influential criminals are receiving extra-ordinary treatment inside the jail? Or, who knows: maybe, they are not inside the jail. Can you still remember who those influential people are? That, after being sentenced, they could still be able to win the Elections while inside the jail; others are outside and still running the government. Is it exclusively happening in the Philippines? Maybe not! In the Ethical parlance, what can you say about the noble institution--a known institution, that is still keeping a supervisor who allegedly harassed one of the helpless ladies in his department. I used the word alleged as I havent heard testimonies from the other victims yet. Nevertheless, I will make it sure that the moment I have established all the vital and necessary evidences against this opportunistic guy, then, I would bring this to the knowledge of the public. I am not scared because I have kept the victims testimony, and will not be afraid if his act of lasciviousness would be fairly paid attention by the proper authorities. But, how can the truth on this matter be prevailing if these proper agencies have just taken the complaint for granted. Look, I even tried accompanying the victim and her husband to her employer to bring the Letter of Complaint against the supervisor. We even tried to bring this case to the knowledge of the Harassment Board and some of the trusted institutions which are known to protecting the rights of women and laborers, but we just became dismayed and hopeless. Instead, the victim is has been continuously receiving forms of harassments from the other end. The good point, the victim is being encouraged by the employer to come back to work. The sad point, she will be working with the same supervisor or will be sent to the other department where the chances of crossing-ways with the harasser is quite possible. Isnt this reality stressful and very intimidating? Last time, I exposed whats going on with one of the victims of harassment and exploitation in Fernie, BC. I even had a professional correspondence with some of the bosses who tried to verbally discriminate their subordinates. I noticed that they are now becoming aware that we are all human beings and needed to be treated accordingly. They have certainly learned a lesson. We also have too. Truth is upon the reach of our hands. Everybody has the right to fight for this truth. But, fighting for the truth would mean that there is an adversary on the other side to protect ones right from the other. So, whats the measuring stick? Who should be the principal witness? Is the tribunals judgment through the Courts Proceedings ever final? Just remember, the truthfulness or falsity of anything or phenomena truly lies on the object itself. There is no objective nothingness or falsity. Nothingness can only be realized when something exists. One may only be false or wrong when the truth exists. They are both truth-bearing realities; therefore, both are real. The one is self-existent and self-evident, while the other exists obviously dependent upon the mind (Esse est percipe). The point is: the other is good and the other is negative evil. Objectively, only the criminal absolutely knows that he is a real or true criminal. Subjectively, the victim has to have witnesses in order to validate the evidences so that the culprit be apprehended the moment he refuses to admit his offense. Lesson1: It is better to do the right thing than to explain why you did it wrong. Lesson2: When encountering an opposition, overcome it by reasoning and not by authority. Lesson3: The welfare of the people is the supreme law.
Posted on: Fri, 04 Apr 2014 01:21:54 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015