What does a life of total dedication to the truth mean?
It means, first
of all, a life of continuous and never-ending stringent
self-examination. We know the world only through our relationship to
it. Therefore, to know the world, we must not only examine it but we must
simultaneously examine the examiner ... There are many ... who stringently
examine the world but not so stringently examine themselves. They may be
competent individuals as the world judges competence, but they are never
wise. The life of wisdom must be a life of contemplation combined with
action. In the past in American culture, contemplation has not been held
in high regard. In the 1950s people labeled Adlai Stevenson an
"egghead" and believed he would not make a good President precisely
because he was a contemplative man, given to deep thinking and
self-doubts. I have heard parents tell their adolescent children in all
seriousness, "You think too much." What an absurdity this is, given the
fact that it is our frontal lobes, our capacity to think and to examine
ourselves that most makes us human. Fortunately, such attitudes seem to
be changing, and we are beginning to realize that the sources of danger to
the world lie more within us than outside, and that the process of
constant self-examination and contemplation is essential for ultimate
survival. Still, I am talking of relatively small numbers of people who
are changing their attitudes. Examination of the world without is never
as personally painful as examination of the world within, and it is
certainly because of the pain involved in a life of genuine
self-examination that the majority steer away from it. Yet when one is
dedicated to the truth this pain seems relatively unimportant--and less
and less important (and therefore less and less painful) the farther one
proceeds on the path of self-examination.
A life of total dedication to the truth also means a life of willingness
to be personally challenged. The only way that we can be certain that our
map of reality is valid is to expose it to the criticism of other
map-makers. Otherwise we live in a closed system--within a bell
jar... rebreathing only our own fetid air, more and more subject to
delusion. Yet, because of the pain inherent in the process of revising
our map of reality, we mostly seek to avoid or ward off any challenges to
its validity. To our children we say, "Don't talk back to me, I'm your
parent." To our spouse we give the message, "Let's live and let live. If
you criticize me, I'll be a bitch to live with, and you'll regret it." To
their families and the world the elderly give the message, "I am old and
fragile. If you challenge me I may die or at least you will bear upon
your head the responsibility of making my last days on earth
miserable." To our employees we communicate, "If you are bold enough to
challenge me at all, you had best do so very circumspectly indeed or else
you'll find yourself looking for another job."
The tendency to avoid challenges is so omnipresent in human beings that it can
properly be considered a characteristic of human nature. But calling it
natural does not mean it is essential or beneficial or unchangeable
behavior. It is also natural to defecate in our pants and never brush our
teeth. Yet we teach ourselves to do the unnatural until the unnatural becomes
itself a second nature. Indeed, all self-discipline might be defined as
teaching ourselves to do the unnatural. Another characteristic of human
nature--perhaps the one that makes us most human--is our capacity to do the
unnatural, to transcend and hence transform our own nature.
...Openness in psychotherapy is particularly encouraged by (or demanded,
depending on your point of view) by the technique of "free
asssociation." When this technique is used the patient is told: "Put into
words whatever comes into your mind, no matter how seemingly
insignificant or embarrassing or painful or meaningless. If there is more
than one thing in your mind at the same time, then you are to choose to
speak that thing about which you are most reluctant to speak." It's
easier said than done. Nonetheless, those who work at it conscientiously
usually make swift progress. But some are so resistant to challenge that
they simply pretend to free-associate. They talk volubly enough about
this or that, but they leave out the crucial details. A woman may speak
for an hour about unpleasant childhood experiences but neglect to mention
that her husband confronted her in the morning with the fact that she had
overdrawn their bank account by a thousand dollars. Such patients attempt
to transform the pyschotherapeutic hour into a kind of press
conference. At best they are wasting time in their effort to avoid
challenge, and usually they are indulging in a subtle form of lying.
For individuals and organizations to be open to challenge, it is necessary
that their maps of reality be truly open for inspection by the
public. More than press conferences are required. The third thing that a
life of total dedication to the truth means, therefore, is a life of total
honesty. It means a continuous and never-ending process of
self-monitoring to assure that our communications--not only the words that
we say but also the way we say them--invariably reflect as accurately as
humanly possible the truth or reality as we know it.
Such honesty does not come painlessly. The reason people lie is to avoid
the pain of challenge and its consequences. President Nixon's lying about
Watergate was no more sophisticated or different in kind from that of a
four-year-old who lies to his or her mother about how the lamp happened to
fall off the table and get broken. Insofar as the nature of the challenge
is legitimate (and it usually is), lying is an attempt to circumvent
legitimate suffering and hence is productive of mental illness.
M. Scott Peck
psychiatrist and author
© M. Scott Peck