Featured
Stories

“There is neither certainty, absolute truth, or metaphysical reality, nor one single perception of people.” – Najmuddin Hossaini

Najmuddin Hossaini, Low Entropy Volunteer Writer

 

      The title is a genuine inquiry that can be probed from different perspectives. One is the philosophical possibility. To investigate it from this viewpoint, it can be articulated that there is no ‘object’ unless with some abstract discernment behind it. Whether the object is real, fictional, a human being, or non-human; a sort of judgment is applied to relate it with some pre-recognitions. For instance, when we express a statement like ‘the car is red’, we go according to common sense. The same condition is true with the phrase “Sara is tall” as well. In these examples, we presupposed that a certain order is called ‘red’ or ‘tall’. That presupposition comes from our pre-recognition of conditions.

 

What does metaphysics say?

      ‘Being’ and ‘reality’ are major elements studied in the metaphysics of philosophy. If we mention at least two noticeable tendencies in this field, we walk back to ancient Greek, the schools of Heraclitus and Parmenides; which have relied upon the topic from two opposite angles. Heraclitus of Ephesus was a pre-Socratic philosopher who believed that there is no permanence in things except “change”. As he expressed, everything is constantly “changing” and “becoming”. His most famous statement is “you cannot step twice in the same river”. Unlike Heraclitus, Parmenides of Elea, another pre-Socratic philosopher, thought that there is some kind of stability in the universe. He indicated, in addition to the changing appearance of universe objects, there is permanent stability in them as well. According to him, things have two dimensions: Appearance which is changing, and essence which is permanent. The connection of these notions with our topic is that we can adopt any of these stances toward people so we will get different results. If we adopt the way of Heraclitus, then people are in an ongoing change condition and our perceptions of them also should follow the same attitude. Hence, no accurate perception is there, unless we examine the people along with our perception of them permanently. 

 

Moral Relativism Position 

      Ethical relativism is an outlook held by moral relativists considering different moral judgments of people. The relativists take on their positions and moral judgments according to the cultural, historical, and social contexts of individuals. Therefore, the results of their viewpoints towards people are different and variable from one person to another and from one society to another. They accept that different individuals can have different views regarding what is ethical or unethical. In different words, moral relativism indicates that everyone ought to be judged concerning the context, and this situation is true somehow even in physics. 

      One of the lessons we learned from Galileo is that we “do not have absolute motion”, or we cannot claim if an object is moving or not in general. Galileo showed that one must always introduce a “ground” or “context” and measure the motion of objects against it. Therefore, we have no such thing as “absolute motion”. Whenever it is stated this object is moving, we should ask “Relative to what?” The point is that there is no absolute truth about the motion of objects, and the motion of objects is only meaningful relative to a context. The outcome the writer gets from the topic of relativism is that our perception of people is relative too. When we opt for a position regarding an individual, we might have inadvertently involved our own culture, social values, and moral judgments in that or we may have avoided the inclusion of the contexts of the other side. Therefore, if we exclude the social, historical, and cultural contexts of others, the possibility of moral errors in our perceptions and judgments toward others is always expected.

 

What is the conclusion?

      At the time we approach one window, other windows are not seen. In other words, we live in the world of multi-meaning instead of one. And, to know it, individuals have to own a wider perspective, different prospects, and an unsolid understanding of the universe. There is neither certainty, absolute truth, or metaphysical reality, nor one single perception of people. We are dealing with a world of possibilities in which individuals perceive people and things differently. So, it is feasible that what we think of people, the way we perceive them, and from the standpoint, we perhaps judge them, are inaccurate. As Rumi, a 13th-century Persian poet, Islamic scholar, and theologian said: “Each interprets my notes in harmony with his feelings, however, not one fathom the secrets of my heart”. Thus, a high chance of having inaccurate imagination about people is always probable. As a last resort, we keep this epistemological inquiry ‘how do we know that something is right or wrong’ reliable.

 

—

 

Najmuddin Hossaini holds a bachelor’s in journalism from Herat University, Afghanistan, and a master’s in philosophy from the University of Pune, India. He has published many articles on the subjects of human rights, women’s rights, education rights of women, peace talks, the Taliban extremism, violence, and environmental issues.