In this day of FAKE NEWS it raises the question of whether the truth is always the thing to know or whether it is better to let proverbial sleeping dogs lie. Is it better to have a president with a bit of baggage but getting the job done or a puritan who achieves nothing?

With the ability to check real paternity, is it better for a kid to grow up believing the father is a hero or just some bum the product of a one night stand?

We look at truth in the basis of law and how law becomes what it says it is. In each of these truths there are varying aspects and almost always questions of whether what is believed to be the truth might be better left unsaid. This aspect arises where governments wish to secure the population from terrorism, harm and the possibility of war or conflicts which might harm them so can justify removal of truth and even propagation of lies under that concept. Attached to it is the way individuals are terrorized into keeping silent even if what governments themselves might do are otherwise criminal

Through all of this it is impossible to ignore the position of belief in religion which has since the dawn of time driven humans on towards progress while constraining them and the herds around them. People want to know where they come from and where perhaps they are going. In relation to truth, it can be seen that truth is what one believes it to be, not necessarily what it is in reality, reinforced by the desire to believe it to be real. In religion it brings home the other side of the hypothesis in regard to whether the truth can set you free since if someone strongly believes in the religion they have been indoctrinated in since birth, this can give them strength to believe they can achieve anything, and might give them comfort in confronting death of relatives and dear ones as well as their impending own. The same issue exists in many culture, so if everything goes wrong, it’s just God’s will.

This question of believing in something only when it is convenient can also be reassuring  if it is possible to just pick out the good parts. The main danger is really when either a person gets into an argument over religion since one person’s good parts might not coincide with another’s good parts, this especially if their religion categorically states that there is no right to challenge anything no matter how contradictory or unbelievable. All of this leaves individuals in a never land between what could be reality and seen as truth on the one hand and divine intervention on the other, yet the whole fabric of Western dominant society was formulated on a religious myth which still transcends all impinging even across the dominance of China’s population.

Which returns to whether there is really an answer on this question of truth and whether it is better to know the truth, ignore it, or believe that untruths are real? Is it better to live in ignorance or to ultimately be faced with the inevitable confrontation of science, will the truth set us free?