On Truth and Falsehood in a post-truth world
This essay focuses on the ontology and epistemology regarding truth and falsehood. This essay covers how language is used to misrepresent, misconstrue, and mislead from reality.
This essay focuses on the ontology and epistemology regarding truth and falsehood. This essay covers how language is used to misrepresent, misconstrue, and mislead from reality. Suggestio falsi and suppressio veri are linguistic principles regarding truth and falsehood that further affect how we interpret events and, to a further degree, reality itself. We explore how propaganda is built on suggestio falsi and suppresio veri, and its links to modern politics.
What is “suggestio falsi”?
Suggestio falsi is Latin for “suggestion of falsehood”.
Whilst not explicitly mentioning falsehood, the sentence is intended to refer to something other than what it explicitly states.
For example, “Jones has not been to prison in the last year.”
The above sentence suggests that John has previously been to prison.
But Jones has never been to prison.
Such statements, whilst not explicitly stating falsehood, are intended to mislead, misrepresent and misconstrue reality.
Suppressio veri and its implications
Suppressio veri, Latin for the “suppression of truth, " is another closely related phenomenon of truth and falsehood.
It is misrepresenting the truth by omitting or suppressing specific vital facts.
An example is a journalist who reports on a conflict yet needs to give the critical historical context in which this conflict took place.
Whilst suggestio falsi suggests an untruth, suppressio veri instead omits, covers and suppresses vital facts critical to an objective, holistic understanding of the premises in a given context.
The latter is a cloak; the former is a dagger.
Whilst the untruth of suggestio falsi can be demonstrated with a lower threshold of argumentation via linguistic manipulation, suppressio veri is more difficult to argue since it involves stating an entirely different conception of reality.
“Repeat a lie often enough, and it becomes the truth.” Such is the illusory truth effect. Following repeated exposure, one is led to believe false information to be correct, regardless of its validity.
Weaponising falsehood
When multiple untruths in suggestio falsi statements are bundled in a narrative, the statements must be re-constructed to bring about the truth: the unveiling of the semantic and pragmatic devices that misdirect and misrepresent the truth.
However, when suppressio veri statements are bundled in a narrative, the utilisation of this epistemological device requires the statements to be put into the context of objective reality. If the truth is suppressed by “death by 1000 wounds”, it becomes increasingly difficult to construct a complete, accurate picture. It has the higher epistemic boundary of the burden of truth. Later, we shall explore the value of truth in the modern world of politics and mainstream media.
When the above are utilised together, they can form a compelling narrative, world-view or frameworkwhere one begins his encounter and subsequent interpretations of unfolding events. One will always interpret reality through this distorted lens predicated on an ontological, metaphysical, and epistemological unreality.
Thus, not only must we examine the truth and falsehood of statements, reports and narratives of the world via an objective, fair and unbiased lens, but we must also take heed of the emotional, psychological and socio-political investments into such an unreality or distortion of reality presented to the audience.
It is apt to note George Orwell’s “1984”, which stated the following.
“In a way, the world-view of the Party imposed itself most successfully on people incapable of understanding it. They could be made to accept the most flagrant violations of reality, because they never fully grasped the enormity of what was demanded of them, and were not sufficiently interested in public events to notice what was happening. By lack of understanding, they remained sane. They simply swallowed everything, and what they swallowed did them no harm, because it left no residue behind, just as a grain of corn will pass undigested through the body of a bird.”
Interpretations of unrealities and possible links to Lacan and Gramsci
Lacanians may relate this to the interpretations regarding the Symbolic and the Imaginary, how the above ideology is internalised in the Imaginary and is developed from the Symbolic from where the source of such narrative becomes a faction of the culture and use of language.
Gramscians may relate the above to the concept of cultural hegemony to show how ideological frameworks build into society's superstructure. Such worldviews and frameworks can be applied to justify economic, political, or militaristic control over countries, states, and subjects.
Further links could be made to the applications of manufactured unrealities, such as with Zizek and the phenomenon of Ideology. Propaganda based on falsehood is the social practice used to maintain the dominant social order and, more deeply, the epistemological and ontological order.
These can be topics of future investigation and analysis, but there are other aims here.
The laws of logic and the binary operators of falsehood
There are three fundamental laws of logic. More specifically, there are three that concern classical logic, the simplest form of logic.
The Law of Identity, A is A. This says something is what it says it is.
The Law of Excluded Middle. Either A is true or not true; there is no third option.
The Law of Non-Contradiction. Either A or Not-A is true at once; they cannot both be true. Both a statement and its negation cannot both be true at once.
The binary operators of falsehood, suggestio falsi and suppressio veri act like the Law of Excluded Middle. Taking P as the statement, they either suggest an unreality or misrepresent the reality. There is no third option when manufacturing falsehood and propaganda.
The above is accurate because a falsehood or untruth is merely the subversion or distortion of truth itself. Truth and falsehood engage on the same ontological and epistemological parameters.
Where propaganda is concerned, the Law of Non-Contradiction is thrown out of the Overton window. Propaganda, by its nature, is designed to misrepresent reality and allow for the valid acceptance of two contradictory beliefs. Thus, this violates the epistemological nature of the inquiry for truth by creating a sense of panic and generating emotional reactions which obscure our rational tendencies. Below is a hypothetical example.
For example, a hospital may have been the victim of an air strike. One claims both of the following as true:
A command base to a terrorist organisation operated under this hospital, making this hospital a legitimate target of the air strike.
We never targeted this hospital.
Moreover, the Law of Identity is seldom held into account. Propaganda, by its nature, is designed to mislead and thus used to mislead on the very concepts and identities of things.
Building on the previous hypothetical scenario:
The very concept of the hospital has now been challenged.
Hospitals can now be multi-functional in this context and may also operate as military bases.
For the more avid readers of logics in philosophy, this elucidation of classical logic may seem elementary. Other forms of logic such as paraconsistent logics do exist and have gained popularity as of late, though their relevance to our investigation is yet to be explored.
Does truth matter in modern politics?
Truth fully realises its social, pragmatic, practical, and actionable value when an objective framework adopted by institutions assesses claims in total consideration. These assessments remain neutral, equalise judgment, recognise sources of biases, and arrive at consistent, equitable, principled, and unwavering conclusions, even in the face of vehement opposition.
In the modern world, truth depends on who is speaking it. Let us examine current world events.
Maintaining falsehoods and propaganda: a case study of politicians
The phenomenon known as “Freudian slips” reveals how falsehood can be exposed when trying to maintain consistency. The notion of “Freudian slips” is that “unconscious influences are revealed by errors”; many such examples can be seen in everyday life. When we unintentionally say something that reveals the true nature of our views, feelings and motivations, we often try to reconcile, dismiss or explain away that very statement.
Amongst the most widely reported professions where this phenomenon is regularly reported is that of politicians. Perhaps this is due to the realm in which politicians deal—ideology, party lines and selective readings to further their self-interests. Often, journalists remark on the politician’s ability to answer questions in such a way as to circumvent the intention of the questioner, reinforce the “party line”, and remain seemingly neutral on taking a strong moral or political view regarding the topic at hand.
Colloquially, we often refer to a calculated, pragmatic answer that neither fully answers the question nor completely disregards it as a “politician’s answer.” It neither deals with truth nor falsehood but rather tangentially answers the question by promoting what the party is doing and what the politician is personally assisting with to tackle the topic. However, there are instances when this framework is abandoned, and the seemingly “truth”, or what the speaker believes to be personally accurate, slips out.
Science shows how hard it is to keep the facade of truth. Hu et al. (2012) find the lie or untruth, peddled via the aforementioned epistemological devices, requires a more significant cognitive effort to sustain. It is more challenging to maintain falsehood than truth precisely because of such falsehoods' weak epistemological and ontological foundations and the mental effort it takes to sustain this alternative narrative.
The ability to recognise the truth is a universal phenomenon. Moreover, when one person slips up and reveals the actual truth of reality, such as Bush’s Iraq-Ukraine comment, it signifies the natural, unconscious disposition of the human psyche to speak the truth and not falsehood.
A classical Islamic interpretation of the above would be that one’s predisposition to truth speaks of the “fitrah”, or the primordial self, which is predisposed to goodness and has a natural proclivity to seek justice and truth rendered upon Earth, and to worship and know God, the Ultimate Truth.
War and propaganda
President George W Bush condemned the “decision of one man to launch a wholly unjustified and brutal invasion of Iraq”. Whoops! “I mean of Ukraine,” he added a second later, as laughter rang out in the room.
The 2003 Iraq War was wholly unjust, resulting in the brutal killing of more than two million civilians and the forced displacement of many thousands. For more details, consult the findings of the Chilcot Inquiry, which detail the failings regarding the foreign state actors in Iraq, chiefly through the lens of the UK.
The main lesson regarding political objectives and realistic assessment of the potential to achieve this is detailed below:
When the potential for military action arises, the Government should not commit to a firm political objective before it is clear that it can be achieved. Regular reassessment is essential, to ensure that the assumptions upon which policy is being made and implemented remain correct. HRM Government (2016: point 828), Chilcot Inquiry: Executive Summary, pg 129, HRM Government Publishing
It remains to be assessed whether the UK Government’s support of the Israeli government during the current Gazan conflict (2023) scrutinised their potential for achieving the desired political objective of a two-state solution predicated on the previous Oslo Accords and UN 1967 borders and lasting peace. This assessment should have been made in light of both the Israeli ambassador to the UK and the Israeli President refusing to discuss the possibility of a two-state solution, the latter affirming the precondition of ultimately achieving their military offensive into the Gaza Strip, whilst the former rejecting it outright.
Indeed, Sunak has now rebuked the Ambassador, though concrete steps to re-evaluate the UK Government’s role and potential to achieve the two-state solution have not been taken. We note Starmer’s absence or overt influence as a deal-maker within the 2025 ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas.
However, it remains to be seen if there will be any civilian political institutions or infrastructure to support a functional Palestinian state in the wake of this incursion, which has seen the equivalent of two atomic bomb’s worth of explosives, 25,000 tonnes, dropped on the “open-air prison”, that is referred to as “Gaza Strip”. This two-state solution has been the consensus of the international community for many decades.
Politics, then, seems to be where truth comes to die, and people gasp audibly when they find an honest politician with integrity who actively seeks justice for all as equals under international humanitarian law and the establishment of truth, justice and equity.
Truth does not have de facto value when neither of these conditions are met. Though its de jure value can translate into a lifting of the veil of propaganda, and thus realising the dominant social paradigm of the time.
Above, I hinted at possible examinations of the value of truth being speaker-dependent. For starters, one could examine this more closely with the phenomenon of Orientalism and the discussion of epistemic justice in general. Said’s Orientalism argues for a more equitable and just mode of disseminating knowledge production; this is epistemic justice at the institutional level. Moreover, Said calls for the inherent power dynamics that come into play from the Orientalist paradigm's monopoly of knowledge production. The depictions of the Orient and its people are factually inaccurate and thus either misrepresent or distort the full scope of the reality (suppresio veri) or suggest statements that are wholly untrue (suggestio falsi). A more nuanced, respectful and objective approach to truth and who is speaking this truth is required.
Others have argued for the notion of a post-truth world. Here, emotion, personal belief, and shamelessly pursuing a political agenda override objective facts and de facto reality. With the rise of social media, which has added to legacy media as news purveyors, the distortion of truth has become an enduring experience for most.
If you do not read the news, you are uninformed. If you do read it, you are misinformed. Denzel Washington.