"In the Name of the Father, The Son and into the hole he goes" so said the children as they baptised the family cat in the washing line prop hole at the bottom of the garden.

Perception, hearing and intuition are not always the way of truth. Not even if all the senses are homogenised and amalgamated into one. Often the written word is said to be the only process through which truth shines, but unfortunately how often have you heard "don’t believe everything you read in the newspaper".

The perception that the written word presents us with the truth is I believe, at serious risk and gives rise to cynicism amongst most of us. More and more it appears in these ever expanding times our direct spheres of truth and dependability on its origins, is diminishing.

Can you, or more importantly do you trust our government to give us the plain truth? Not just our government, any government. Was this always so? I guess if you believe in your history books, you could believe in the facts as they were presented a certain percentage of the time. But obviously that was before the consequence of a premise of "when is a promise not a promise".

Certainly not when it is the expected but honourable consequence of an unreliable word given. No, to quote a most trusted source a promise is not a promise when it is not a core promise. Conclusion being that a core promise must be something to do with the economic bottom line and procurement of votes.

And, as for the history books who wrote them, probably many a good man and woman. But the questions still arise.

From whose point of view were they written? Is the information slanted in a given direction? Who was the conqueror? Was history ever re-written to reflect the other side? As no doubt we have all heard at some time, statistics could be manipulated to suit the cause in hand, or to interpret the facts to mirror the angle sought. So what type of truth is being reflected to us as we go about our daily lives in the inherited mantle of our forbears. Maybe it isn’t healthy for our psyches to daily bear the brunt, weight and struggle of centuries of living lies.

So in fact are we receiving the truth of manipulation, a masking of facts or indeed a warping of events based on perceptive values of opposing sides? For example: Our early settlers versus the original landowners. What is it that makes one protagonist see a war but the other to see the same issue as necessary land protection, with subsequent results showing histories being at variance with fact on both sides?

Truth I believe is absolute, no shades of grey, and should be found in the accumulation of all available faculties. Just observation alone cannot always be trusted and things do not always appear to be, as they seem.

A bit like the dishevelled man who returns home late at night, and is seen getting out of his car carrying a ladies’ shoe.

His neighbour unable to sleep peers out her living room window and based on her observation makes her own judgement. She thinks he has murdered some poor woman and is still carrying the shoe as a type of weird token of the event. In actual fact, he is married, given someone a lift he possibly shouldn't have, shouldn’t have been where he was, he’s late, he’s worried, explanations will be due and he’s stuck with this wretched shoe to dispose of.

Whose truth we ask is acceptable? Maybe neither truth nor intuitive observation is fully correct, especially when it is found the very next day that the woman our friend has been visiting with, is found floating somewhat dead down the Yarra, and in all truth missing one shoe. Time now to leave perceptive truth and head for the hands-on forensic, provable, jugular type honesty.

Even truth in words "doing the rounds" is rarely found to be accurate. A sort of Chinese whispers that finishes doing more damage than the initial passing of a minor, negative truth; especially if couched in believable language, coming from a reliable source and based on something you may have a vicarious interest in. My sons have in the past asked me did I know that they, the iniquitous "they", have taken the word "gullible" out the dictionary. This query in relation to me expecting to hear the truth from the media, or in any other form of public pronouncement, has the effect of incensing me. Except in terms of protecting people, family/friends, and even that is debatable, who exactly has the God given right to emtomb and keep people under mushrooms and feed them matured bulldust .

When I was a child it was deemed OK to tell little white lies, as opposed I guess to big, fat whoppers. These lies came out of left field and were acceptable from the point of view that supposedly they were rooted in diplomatic, soft shoe shuffles where no feelings were hurt, for whatever reason. But even so the lies were told and therefore you could say that they were not the truth.

The truth of the day when furtively put to one side, could cause you to dig yourself a very large hole of some description if, for example down the track you forgot your original porky-pie, whooper of a story. Untold truths have in essence, the ability to trip you up and embed you in a heap of some very hot coals.

copyright: a.a.gallagher 20/6/2000

http://hubpages.com/hub/BehavioursFear

http://hubpages.com/hub/BehavioursSolitude

http://hubpages.com/hub/Behaviours-on-love-and-loss