On Truth and History: A Response to Deborah Lipstadt’s TEDx Talk

-

Whenever I try to amalgamate the concepts “History” & “Truth”, my thoughts invariably gravitate towards the advent of post-modernism and its impact on these notions.  Post-modernism believes that there is no ‘Truth’, only ‘truths’; no sole Grand Narrative, but rather a multitude of narratives. History is a narrative narrated by a narrator. A historian is no less than a storyteller. But whose story? Her or his story. “History is written by the victors”. Before her untimely death in 2016, the late Philippine senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago succinctly expressed this view when she declared on national television, “There is no truth, only interpretation of facts.”

In her compelling TEDx talk, American historian Dr. Deborah E. Lipstadt contends that truth, nowadays, is under assault with truth-sayers finding themselves on the defensive. Drawing from her experiences in confronting Holocaust deniers, Lipstadt highlights the challenges posed by those who dismiss historical truths. Initially skeptical of engaging with Holocaust denial -- as she thought of it as a waste of time by comparing it to the hilarious belief that Elvis Presley is still alive --  she eventually took on the task, leading to a libel lawsuit filed against her by history writer David Irving—a legal battle documented in her talk titled "My Courtroom Battle with a Holocaust Denier." 

Lipstadt's decision to confront Irving in court was a courageous stance against the potential acceptance of falsehoods, such as the denial of systematic plans to murder Jews, the existence of gas chambers Konzenstrationlager (concentration camps), and the complicity of Hitler and the Third Reich in the Holocaust. These are the falsehoods Lipstadt would like to correct in her legal battle against Irving, who was eventually convicted by the court-of-law to be a neo-Nazi whose pattern of history writing on the holocaust is cast on the idea: “blame the Jews and exonerate the Nazis”. The court's favorable judgment attested to the importance of standing up for historical truth.

I concur with Lipstadt that we must not be beguiled by rational appearances or be troubled, be swayed or falter when truth and facts are under attack. Instead, she urges us to take an offensive stance, demanding evidence or justifications from those who make claims. Lipstadt emphasizes the urgency of standing for truth: “To stand for Truth is urgent and to postpone it at a later time would be already too late.”

The concept that truth is relative is not something novel. It goes back to the Greeks, especially with Protagoras, who famously said that “Man is the measure of all things”. This was prevalent in ancient times. Remember what Pontius Pilate asked Jesus? “What is Truth?” In modern times, the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche said that there is no Truth. But like what Lipstadt implied in her talk, the relativity of truth is rationally problematic. The truth of the statement ‘Truth is relative’ must be taken into consideration for it to even make sense, i.e., the statement ‘There is no truth’ must be at least true. Otherwise, it is meaningless if not utterly false.

I stand with Lipstadt that we, whether historians or not, must be vanguards of Truth or what is true. She encourages us to be like contemporary versions of Galileo who stubbornly held the view that the Earth is not flat despite the thunderous threats from the Vatican. But here’s a (small) caveat: We must also learn and not totally abandon post-modernism and its “narratives”, as nuanced as this may sound. In finding rational narratives based on facts, we may be able to decide whose story is indeed credible. This must be taken with the backdrop of what lies are, according to Lipstadt. “Lies are opinions dressed in rational appearance.” Maybe there is truth in the saying that we don’t see things as they are, but see things as we are. But in being who we are, and being true to what we are, telling the truth may not need to be a revolutionary act, but an ordinary act that flows from our being. After all, consistently telling the truth not only upholds our integrity but also spares us from the burden of remembering the lies we tell others. 

by Frank Parawan, 2018

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

On Legalese & Plain Rice

-
                       Reaction papers are uncanny things for they are essays, alright, but they have an excuse for their being; that is, one’s reaction on paper! And, for the love of connections or relations, reactions not spontaneous enough would be artificial or, in a more rustic term, ‘plastic’. Its truth lies in its spontaneity, like responding a glib “ Yes ” to your girlfriend’s query about her beauty. (A 2-second pause would make you her ex-boyfriend.) In like manner, a thoroughly planned Reaction Paper is (almost) an oxymoron like a manufactured antique made (in) you know where.  Nostalgia. The earliest account I know when it comes to the defining of the word ‘simple’, is that of Euclid whose geometry is still being studied today. (To Russell's disgust.) Euclid has defined a point as that which has no parts, and that which has no parts is what being simple is. Fast forward to the 19th century, the Brit...
Read more

The Clockmaker’s Silence

-
  If you listen closely, even now, you might hear it: the faint hum beneath your own days, the shimmer at the edge of a shadow, the patient gaze of a cat. For time is not elsewhere. It is the horizon of our being, the fabric of our lives. And each of us is both thread and weaver. The Clockmaker’s Silence There was a town where time slipped through the streets unnoticed, like a stray cat no one bothered to chase. The baker worked when the air grew cool. Children came home when their laughter lost its brightness. The church bell rang, though only when the bell-ringer remembered he was supposed to ring it. No one measured the hours, and no one felt the lack of them. To live was simply to drift along, as if eternity were already theirs. Yet on a crooked little street, where lanterns flickered even when there was no wind and cats gathered as though waiting for secrets, stood a clock shop. The shop smelled faintly of oil and persimmons, though no one could say why. Inside, clocks lined t...
Read more

Welcome to ContiN0US!

-
  Dear Readers, As the creator of this platform and a dedicated student of Philosophy, I extend a warm welcome to you on this extraordinary journey. ContiN0US is more than a digital sanctuary—it is a transformative quest, a pilgrimage to bridge the divides between philosophical traditions. Here, we embrace the challenge of uniting not only the Western and Eastern philosophical realms but also the Analytic and Continental traditions. Our mission is to foster dialogue, seeking connections that transcend artificial boundaries. Like intrepid explorers, we stand on the very divisions that once separated these schools of thought, using these vantage points to uncover hidden similarities and shared aspirations. Within ContiN0US, you'll discover a digital oasis—a place where words take flight, ideas soar freely, and thoughts find continuity. Just as an airport terminal marks the beginning and both the culmination and continuance of our intellectual explorations, ContiN0US signifies the inf...
Read more