Studies - Srce

Studies

OriginalpaperUDC[165:32]:621.39(045)doi:10.21464/sp33211

Received:October22,2018

Pavo BarišićInstituteofPhilosophy,UlicagradaVukovara54,HR–10000Zagreb

[email protected]

Truth and Politics in the Age of Digital Media

AbstractWith the widespread omnipresence of digital social media, the truth has lost some of its reli-ability and objectivity, several authors warn nowadays. In fact, when an age brings to the foreground the tensions of truthfulness and falsehood, correct information and fake news, reality and fiction, genuineness and delusion, this testifies to the unpredictability and in-scrutable nature of the confusion into which public communication has been entrained. The rapid development of new media and digital technologies is causing a far-reaching process of change, especially in the field of politics. In his book on “the post-truth era”, Ralph J. Keyes announced the advent of a “fib-friendly times”, in which “more lies than ever are be-ing told” (Keyes 2004, 4). However, the considerations in this paper rest on a more cautious and critical approach. They support a viewpoint of pluriperspectivism. The new media have surely raised a challenge to contemporary communications. Political affairs are always about certain perspectives and contributions in the constant agon or contest of truth. There is no completely neutral and non-partisan claim to truth, as some philosophers and scientists aspired to represent. Because of its particular nature, the truth can be revealed only with controversy and effort, never without participation and beyond any perspectives. Neverthe-less, neither does the truthdecline nor do we enter an age of post-truth. Moreover, we can ar-gue about the question which age tends more towards the lie and fake news. Politics is not in a more difficult state today than it has ever been, nor is it in a much simpler position in terms of truth. The truth remains for politics a supporting ground and a permanent benchmark for assessment. It can be discovered only in its pluri-perspective appearance.

Keywordstruth,truthfulness,lie,fakenews,politics,democracy,digitalmedia,post-truthera,pluri-perspectivism

Thispaperisabouttheancientphilosophicalquestionontheinnerrelation-shipbetweentruthandpolitics.1Intheageofsocialmediaandtheupswingoftechnical-digitalmediatedcommunication,theage-oldantagonismshave

1

Themainthesesofthisarticlewerepresentedat the International Conference on PoliticalEthicsandSocialAdministrationattheRen-minUniversityofChinainBeijingonAugust

22,2018inEnglishandattheDaysofFranePetrićinCres,CroatiaonSeptember25,2018inGerman.

https://doi.org/10.21464/sp33211

SYNTHESISPHILOSOPHICA66(2/2018)pp.(489–501)

P.Barišić,TruthandPoliticsintheAgeofDigitalMedia490

beenrekindledinanewlight.Someresearchesandconsiderationspointtoanunleashingofmediaandastrikingmultiplicationofcommunication.Atthesametime,however,certainobserverspaygreatattentiontoaconspicuousdeclineinsincerityandtheblossomingofthespreadofuntruthsininterper-sonalrelationships.As a result, more and more cautionary accounts and worrying analysesemergebearingwitnesstoapost-truthera,apost-factualage,anintoxicationwithuntrueinformation,deceptions,andlies.Inhisin-depthinvestigationofthesituationinthemediaandcommunicationinsocialnetworks, thecom-municationscientistStephanRuss-Mohlwarnedoftheconsequencesofthedigitalmediarevolutionandthechallengesfordemocracyofuntruths,falsereportsandpropagandistictechniquesinpublicrelationswork.2Thethreattopublicspace,theconcernofpoliticswiththetruthfadingisoftenportrayedindystopianimages,andnotwithoutjustifiedreason.In lightof thedigital transformationofmedia reality, the followingconsi-derationaddressesthechallengesthathavenowbeenraisedinthegenerallyacceptedideologicallyneutralviewpointofmodernscienceandtheprevail-ingliberaldemocracy.Thefundamentalphilosophicalquestioniswhetherarationalconstructionofsocietycanbepostulatedwithoutaclaimonthetruth.Throughnewmediaandsocialnetworks, thedemocraticagonof truthanduntruth,properjudgment,anddeceptivedelusionissignificantlyintensified.Basedonanexaminationofthestateofthemediaandcommunications,theinvestigationfocusesontheclaimofphilosophyandinparticularofmodernscienceonobjectivityandneutrality,aclaimhonouredsinceancienttimes.Thequestioniswhatthenewmediahavetosayabouttheivorytowerper-spective.Whataboutalocationremotefrompoliticalconflicts,fromwhichsciencecanimpartiallyviewthetruthandjudgethepoliticalcompetitions?

1. Decline of Truthfulness as a Nightmare of the Present

AfterthelatestFacebook-CambridgeAnalyticadatascandal,inwhichcompa-niesweresellingandpoliticianswerebuyingandusingthecollectedpersonalinformation,moreandmorevoicesaresignalling thatpubliccommunication,withthedominanceofsocialmedia,haslostsomeofitsreliabilityandobjectiv-ity.FacebookfounderMarkZuckerberg,whowasheardintwodays’testimonyon10and11April,2018, in theUSCongressadmittedabusingthedataandadvocatedagreater“regulation”inthefuture.Heacknowledgedthefollowing:“Theinternetisgrowinginimportancearoundtheworldinpeople’slivesandIthinkthatitisinevitablethattherewillneedtobesomeregulation.SomypositionisnotthatthereshouldbenoregulationbutIalsothinkthatyouhavetobecarefulaboutregulationyouputinplace.”3

Sincetheendofthetwentiethcentury,achangebroughtaboutbyubiquitousdigitizationhascapturedvariousareasof life. Inparticular, thechanges incommunicationbehaviourhavecometolight.Theeffectsofthenewmediaarebecomingvisiblenotonly inpublic lifebut also in theprivate sphere.Themisuseofdigitalpowerhasalsocausedmorescepticismaboutthetruth-fulnessofinformationtoindividualsandpoliticalspacealike.Whenanagebringsto theforegroundthetensionsof truthfulnessandfalsehood,correctinformationandfakenews,realityandfiction,genuinenessanddelusion,thistestifies to theunpredictabilityandinscrutablenatureof theconfusionintowhichpubliccommunicationhasbeenbrought.Moreandmore, thedisputesdealwith thequestionhowtodistinguishbe-tweentheobjectivetruthsanddistortednewsinthistimeofpost-truth.Itis



notentirelyclearwhatimpactthecurrentdominantformofdemocracywillhaveonacertaindarkeningandeclipsingofthetruthinpubliccommunica-tion.Arethehighexpectationsforaprofoundchangeinthepolicythatshouldspringfromthisabout-turnjustified?Ontheotherhand,isitactuallyafurtherformationinthehistoryofthetruth,whichinitsmulti-perspectivenatureisnowrevealingnewappearanceforms?In2004,theauthorofgeneralexpertisebooks,RalphJ.Keyes,towhomtheauthorshipofthenowverypopularterm“post-truthera”isattributed,pro-claimedthedawnof“fib-friendlytimes”,inwhich“moreliesthaneverarebeingtold”.4Allegedly,a“declineoftruthfulness”occurredattheturnofthemillennium.Amongvariouscausesofthisfloodofuntruthandliesincon-temporarycommunication,hepointsout,ontheonehand,thepostmodernistquestioningofliteraltruthand,ontheotherhand,thefacilitationofthedis-seminationofuncheckednewsonline.ItispreciselythissecondfocusthatthreescientistsfromtheMassachusettsInstituteofTechnologyhaveanalyticallysubstantiatedwiththeirfindingsinaparticularstudy,whichwaspublishedinthejournalScienceinMarch2018onthesubjectof“TheSpreadofTrueandFalseNewsOnline”.TheresearchfindingsofSinanAral,DebRoyandSoroushVosoughustronglysuggestthatmuchmorefalsecontentasopposedtocorrectnewsisbeingdisseminatednowadaysonsocialmedia.Theirinvestigationof126,000Twittertweetsoverthe 11-year period between 2006 and 2017 has led them to conclude thatuntruecontentis“70%morelikelytoberedistributed”thanthecorrectmes-sage.5Inaddition,thespeedofspreadingofthefalsereportsisthreetimesgreaterthanthatofthecorrectinformation.Forourconsideration,itisofcru-cialimportancethat,amongthedifferentareasexamined,thepoliticalissuesaremostaffectedbytheuntrueinformation.Inthiscontext,itisprobablynotsurprisingthatthecontroversial,butatthesametimequitemeaningful,termpost-truthwasproclaimedtheinternationalwordoftheyear2016.TheeditorsoftheOxfordUniversityDictionary,byse-lectingthispeculiarwordcomposition,havedrawnattentiontotheincreasingevasionofauditedandimpartialfactsinthecontemporarydesignofpublicopinion.Anever-growingpropensity for theunreliableandarbitrary inter-pretationofthenews,fuelledanddisseminatedthroughsocialnetworksandrelatedmedia,bordersonanillusionistimage.Themeaningofthetermpost-truthisbasedonthefactthatobjectivefactsappealtopublicopinionlessthantheattractivepowerofemotionsandpersonalbeliefs:

2

See: Stephan Russ-Mohl, Die informierte Gesellschaft und ihre Feinde. Warum die Digitalisierung unsere Demokratie gefähr-det, Halem, Köln 2017. The book (en. The Informed Society and Its Enemies)hasadis-tinctivequestioningsubtitle(en.Why Digiti-zation Threatens our Democracy).

3

InhisseconddayonCapitolHill,Zuckerbergsaid that his own data was handed to Cam-bridgeAnalytica. See:DavidSmith, “Zuck-erbergputonbackfootasHousegrillsFace-bookCEOoverusertracking”,The Guardian(April 11, 2018).Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/apr/11/

zuckerberg-hearing-facebook-tracking-ques-tions-house-back-foot (accessed on August9,2018).

4

RalphJ.Keyes,The Post-Truth Era: Dishon-esty and Deception in Contemporary Life,St.Martin’sPress,NewYork2004,p.4.

5

PeterDizikes,“OnTwitter,falsenewstravelsfasterthantruestories”, MIT News (March8,2018).Availableat:http://news.mit.edu/2018/study-twitter-false-news-travels-faster-true-stories-0308(accessedonAugust9,2018).



“Relatingtoordenotingcircumstancesinwhichobjectivefactsarelessinfluentialinshapingpublicopinionthanappealstoemotionandpersonalbelief.”6

Behindit,accordingtomany,istheallusiontoadubious,nowadaysheight-ened, tendency to judgepublicaffairs,not somuchon thebasisof reasonandjudgment,butbecauseofpersonalviews,excitingfeelingsor–notinfre-quently–widespreadprejudices.Inthesameyear,theGerman-languagesociety,whichhasbeenregularlyhon-ouringtheformativeandprevalentphrasesformorethanfourdecades,haschosenaGerman-languageequivalentof“post-truth”asthewordoftheyear.Itistheadjective“postfaktisch”(post-factual),whichmarkstheconfusedsitu-ationwiththefactualandnon-factualtruthandisfullofsubstantialallusions.ChancellorAngelaMerkeldocumented,inter alia,thephrase“post-faktischeZeiten”inoneofherspeeches.7Intheloan-wordofpost-truthfromAmericanEnglish,thejuryoftheGermanSocietyforGermanLanguagesoughttodrawattentiontothegenerallydominantviewthat“nottheclaimtotruth,butthepronouncementofthe‘perceivedtruth’istrend-setting”.8Therapidriseofso-cialmediaasasourceofnewshasthusledinthepublicdiscoursetoincreasedmistrustofthetruthofthefactual.Thishasledtoanimpressionofgreaterignoranceoffactsandtoacceptanceofevenobviouslies.Thatsomethingdramatichasrecentlybeenhappeninginthepublicdiscourseofthemediawiththevenerable,objectivetruthfulness,whichusuallycomesfirstamongtheprinciplesofthepresscodes,9hasalsotestifiedtotheboomofrelatedandadjoiningphrases.Forthesameyear2016,theAustralianeditorsofMacquarieDictionarydisclosedthenowinfamousfake news asthemostpopularwordstructure.10Certainly,theproliferationofnewsthroughdigitalnetworkshastangiblymultiplieddistortedfacts,fakenews,falsesuspicions,andfictitiousmessages.Inparticular,AmericanpresidentialelectionsandthesuspensefulbehaviourtowardsthemediaofPresidentDonaldTrumphaveaccentuatedthedistinc-tivenatureofthefake news.TheAmericanDialectSocietyhaschosen“fakenews”astheWordoftheYearfor2017asayieldofitsragingpopularityvor-tex.Thissignificantandevermorepopular“catchphrase”mostimpressivelysymbolisesthefocusofpublicandpoliticaldisputesofthepresent.Itpointstotwobasicmeanings.Ontheonehand,itisabout“disinformationandfalse-hoodspresentedasrealnews”.Ontheotherhand,thetermrefersto“actualnews”thatisbroadcastina“falseanddistorted”11way.However, thisphenomenon isbynomeans somethingnew inhistory.ThefactthatpeoplearemoreinclinedtoadeceptiveopinionthantrueknowledgehasbeendiagnosedandwarnedagainstbymanyancientphilosophersfromHeraclitusandParmenidestoPlatoandAristotle.Therefore,theydealtwiththebeneficial revealingstrategiesof the“real lie”andmisleadingopinion,which“wouldnotonlybehatedbygods,butalsobymen”.12Peoplelie,makemistakes,deceivethemselvesandothersoutofignorance–thiswasoneofthecentralthesesofPlato’sPoliteia.Whethertheuntruthspreadsaroundonlyoutofignorance,orthepeopledothisconsciouslyanddeliberately,wecannotexamineminutelyhere.However,ifonehadmeasuredinPlato’sAthensorParmenidesʼEleahowmuchmoreandfasterfalsemessageswererelayedasopposedtotruecommunications,IamnotquitesureiftheTwitterresearchwoulddiffermaterially.Genuinetruthhasneverhadalightcontestwiththerealorseeminglie.Itisallaboutestablishingajustconstitutionofsocietyinwhich,despitethisdeception,onecanliveinfreedomandenjoywell-beingandpeace.



2. Tension Between Truth and Lie

Theaccesstothisquestionisthereforemorecautiousandmorecriticalinthisanalysis.Thenewmediahaveadmittedlyraisedachallengetotoday’scommuni-cation.Nevertheless,itisallaboutthecontrolmechanismsofsocialmedia.Thetotalamountofhumansins,meanwhile,apartfromtheincreasedtechnicalpos-sibilitiesfordistributinglies,falsereportsandfakemessages,doesnotchangesoeasily.Inanycase,wecanhardlymeasurethisandjudgeitobjectively.Thedescriptionsandanalysesofsocialtheoristshaveregisteredandlistedsomestrangephenomena.13However,toinferfromtheindividualmanifestationsofex-periencetothegeneralitywouldbetoexposeoneselftothedangeroftheinduc-tionproblemandtoerror.Manyexamplesinhistoryshowthatpeoplearemoreandmorededicatedtorelayingliesandrumoursthantruenews.Inaddition,thefascinationwiththedeityFamemayprovidesomeallegoricalevidence.Apartfromthis,however,humanendeavourfortruthfulnessremains,asalways,oneoftheguidingbehaviouralorientationsofhismoralactivityandpoliticallife.Thequestionofthetruthandveracityofcommunitysteeringaswellasthedelusionofthecitizenstodiscussinpublic,totalkaboutfreelyandwithoutrestraintintheassemblies,intheagoraandforum,hasalwaysbeenandstillis a special privilege of democracy. Most forms of rule that have hithertobeen tried and testedhavemostlybeenhostile to thepublicuseof reasonandconjointdeliberativecounselling.Someofthemhaveoftenrepressedorexpelled the freethinkers, forbidding their thinking, supervising the books,puttingtheirthoughtsontheindicesandremovingtheirworksfromgeneralaccess.However,thetruthinitsresistancetolieanddeceptionremainsthefocalpointofphilosophicalconsiderations.Thetensionbetweentruthandlie,factandfalsehoodisineradicable.Thesepairs of opposites have their source in the depths of human moral nature.Howcanthisprofoundcontestoverthetruthensurethestabilityofthemoralorder?Isdemocracyindeedanoutstandingformofsocietythatcanbecondu-

6

NeilMidgley,“WordoftheYear2016–Post-Truth”,Oxford Living Dictionaries.Availableat:https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/word-of-the-year/word-of-the-year-2016(accessedonAugust9,2018).

7

Jochen A. Bär, “GfdS wählt ‘postfaktisch’zumWortdesJahres2016”,Die Gesellschaft für deutsche Sprache (December 9, 2016).Available at: https://gfds.de/wort-des-jahres-2016/#postfaktisch (accessed on August 9,2018).

8

Ibid.

9

The Press Code of German Publishers andJournalists, published by the German PressServicein1973,definesinthefirstparagraphthe “supreme commandments of the pressrespect for the truth, respect forhumandig-nityandtruepublic information”.See:“DerPressekodex”, Deutscher Presserat. Avail-ableat:http://www.presserat.de/pressekodex/pressekodex/(accessedonAugust9,2018).

10

ElleHunt, “‘Fakenews’namedwordof theyearbyMacquarieDictionary”, The Guard-ian (January24,2017).Availableat:https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/jan/25/fake-news-named-word-of-the-year-by-macquarie-dictionary?CMP=soc_568(ac-cessedonAugust9,2018).

11

AlanMetcalf,“‘FakeNews’ is2017Ameri-can Dialect Society word of the year”,American Dialect Society(January5,2018).Available at: https://www.americandialect.org/fake-news-is-2017-american-dialect-so-ciety-word-of-the-year(accessedonAugust9,2018).

12

Arno Baruzzi, Philosophie der Lüge, Wis-senschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt1996,p.151.

13

Cf. Simone Dietz, “Lügen in Privatleben,PolitikundMassenmedien”,in:Maria-Sybil-laLotter(ed.),Die Lüge. Texte von der Antike bis in die Gegenwart,pp.349–402,Reclam,Stuttgart2017.



civetotheappearanceoftruthinitsdialecticalform?Thesequestionsarenoteasytoanswer.Inthepoliticalrabble-rousingpropagandaandstirring-upofpeople,manyuntruthsanderrorsbecomeknown.Inthemediumofpublicopinion,truthismixedwithlying,therealwithap-pearance,therealbeingwithnonbeing.Asarule,manycanhardlyjudgethisongoingagon.Therefore,philosophers,whohavedevotedthemselvesinpar-ticulartothesearchfortruthandtherealknowledge,haveoftenbeencriticalofdemocracy.Itistoodependentonthewaveringorganofpopularopinion,fromwhichthestewardshipofthedemosgetsitslegitimacy.Philosophers sometimes offer resistance and campaign against distortionsofthisrulebythepeople.Thefateofthatjust,wiseandtruthfulAthenian,Socrates,isstilltodayconsideredasaburdenandshameontheoriginalandadmirableAttic model of democracy. In spite of his fascinating speechesandapologies,hecouldnotensurethevictoryoftherealfactsandthetruthagainstthebiasedblindnessofthecrowd.Sincehewasunfairlycondemnedtodeathinapublictrialinfrontof500judges,hispersonaltragedyhasbeenassociatedwiththedirectandradicalformofpopularrule.Inhiswell-knowncomedyThe Clouds, inwhichSocrates,whilestillaliveandinhistruth-seekingacme,wasunjustlyderided,Aristophaneshasprovedwhytheunjustlogoscandefeatthejustlogos.Itisabouttruthandappear-ance.Thepublic,thecitizenswhoarecalledtothejudgment,arenotalwaysreadytoendurethetruthintheiressence.Thedemagoguesunderstanditverywelltoseducethecrowdwiththebogusfactsandfalsepromises.Thisbe-haviourof the crowdhas led to thewidespreadview that lying,deceptionanddelusionbelongtothestatesman’scraft.Towhatextentdoesthisfindingaffecttheactivitiesofdemocraticstaterulers?

3. Pluriperspectivism and the Search for Truth in Politics

With regard to thepre-conductedaccountsof thecurrent stateofaffairs, thequestionnowarisesastowherethetruthseekersactuallystandwiththiscompe-tition.Howdothescientistsandthephilosophersreacttothedemocraticcontestfortruth?Inwhatrolearetheyinvitedtopublicconsultationsanddisputes?Dothey,withtheirperspectives,essentiallybelongtothedemocraticdebateofthearguments?Aretheytheopponents,therefereesortheaudience?Cantheyex-tricatethemselvesfromtheconflictoftheone-sidedpro et contraandwithdrawtoaneutralpositionawayfromeverydaypolitics?Dotheyobservethepoliticaldisputesaboutthecommongoodasshadowsinthehumancave?Isthereasci-entific,world-untouchedandsecludedplace,araisedivorytower,fromwhichonecoulddispassionatelycontemplatethepoliticalrivalryofliesandtruth?WhenHannahArendtdescribedthefieldofpolitics,shetookacriticallookattheviewthatscientistsshouldadoptaneutralandprominentlysecludedview-point.Throughoutthetwo-thousand-yearhistoryofphilosophy,therearesuchmodelsofscientificimpartialseclusionfrompolitics.FamousareanecdotalstoriesaboutHeraclitus’rejectionoftheofferedpoliticalauthorityandhisre-treattothetempleofArtemisorPlato’sparableofthetruth-seeker’sliberatingascensionfromthecavetothesunlightofeternalideas.AsfarasHeidegger’sremotewoodenhutintheBlackForest,orthepositivistscientist’scontempo-raryquestforexpertneutrality,weperenniallyencounterattemptstojudgetheagonoftruthfromabove,fromadistance,fromameta-perspective.Whetherthismeta-perspective–wherethetruthrevealsitselfinpureformandindependentlyofvariousopinionsandinterests–existsisareallyprofound



question.Inheressayonthetruthandpolitics,HannahArendthasreferredtoseveralphilosopherstobearwitnesstoapositivejustification.InPlato’scase,thedistinctionbetweenνοῦς,thetruth-hearingreason,andtheknowledgeofchangeableopinionsarecorroboratedbyevidence-demonstratingpersuasive-ness.14HugoGrotiusevendenieddivineomnipotencethepowertodisposeofthecompellingtruths,suchasthefactthattwotimestwomakeupfour.15Thisseclusionofmathematicalprinciplesandrationaltruthstoanimperviousheightpursuedthepurposeofrestrictingthedespoticruleofabsoluterulersbyabsolutetruth.Inthebackgroundstoodtheefforttoblocktyrannicalprincesfrommanipulatingthetruthbysolidifyingitonameta-partisanlevel.Theperceptionthatinthepoliticalthetruthissubjectedtocertainpartisandis-tortionsseemstobeundoubtedlyconvincing.Asarule,thevictorwriteshistruthanew,reversingitsformershape.Themightiertriestoimposehisviewsthroughrawcompulsion.Thisoftenhappensthroughviolationoffactualtruth.Correctopinionscanbeestablishedthroughafreepersuasionandagreementofall.Totalitarianrulershaveprovenhowitispossibletooverturnthetruthovernight.Thequestionnowiswhetherthesedangerscouldbeavoidediftheobserverswithdrewtoaneutralground.Itisatemptingidea,however,whichisdifficulttoreconcilewiththenatureoftruthintheworldofexperience.Thebasicprobleminattemptingtoabsolutisethetruthisthatitisinherentlymany-perspectivalinitsparticularnature.Thischaracterisationinnowayde-niesthatthereisobjectivetruth,factualtruth,orrationaltruthassuch.Inthefiniteworld,however,factualtruthrarelyappearsinitspureform,initses-sence.Itmanifestsitselfratherdecomposedintomultifariousperspectives.Intheperspectiveofrefractionofthetruth,deceptionandliesinterferemoreorlesswiththeirappearanceforms.Differentperspectivesareopenedupthroughdiverselightsanddifferentstandpointsfromwhichthetruthisviewed.Thetruthisuniqueinitsnature,butitsperspectivesareinnumerable.Thisperspectivaltensionintherelationshipbetweentruthanditsmanifoldmanifestations has been particularly addressed in theRenaissance. Just asRenaissancepaintersincorporatedperspectivismintotheirmagnificentpaint-ings,MichelMontaigne’smetaphorical expression in his famous essay ontheliaralsoexpressedtheversatilityoflieinthelifeworld.Asasagaciousobserverofhumanaffairs,whohaspittedhimselfvigorouslyinthefieldofpoliticalcompetitions,hepointedtothediversityoflie’sfaces.Incontrasttoitsantagonist,thetruth,whichhasonlyoneface,theuntruthconcealsitselfthroughitsmanifoldtransformationsinanunlimitedfield.“Iffalsehoodhad,liketruth,butonefaceonly,weshouldbeuponbetterterms;forweshouldthentakeforcertainthecontrarytowhattheliarsays:butthereverseoftruthhasahundredthousandforms,andafieldindefinite,withoutboundorlimit.”16

Thisenigmaticvarietyofthelieisprobablythesourcefromwhichthemani-foldexposures,theperspectivesoftruthactuallyflow.Inpublicspace,theseraysareoftenmultipliedandpropagatedbysubjectivescreens.

14

Hannah Arendt, Wahrheit und Lüge in der Politik. Zwei Essays,Piper,München–Zürich21987[1972],p.60.

15

Ibid.Cf.HenningOttmann,“Die‘edleLüge’undihreRolleinderPolitik”,Synthesis philo-sophica19(2004)2,pp.329–336.

16

MicheldeMontaigne,Essays,vol.1(1580),9,128, translatedbyCharlesCotton,EdwinC. Hill, New York 1910. Originally: “Si,commelaverité, lemensongen’avoitqu’unvisage,nousserionsenmeilleurstermes.Carnousprenderionspourcertainl’opposédecequediroitlementeur.Maislereversdelaver-itéacentmillefiguresetunchampindéfini.”See:Michel deMontaigne,Essais I, 9, 56,Gallimard,Paris1950.



Theparadoxofknowingthetruthnowcomesfromthefactthatthewaytothetruthcannotcircumventorevadethelies.Rather,toapproachtherealtruth,theconfrontationwith the lies is tobecarriedout. Inhisdialectics,Hegelsaw this paradox and tried to save the absolute truth through an incessantplayofcontradictionsbylinkingitbacktothemetaphysicallogosdoctrine.Nietzsche,however,withhisnihilistichammer laid thismetaphysicalcon-structioninruinsandopenedthewaytogeneralperspectivism.Thepositivistscienceshavebeenproclaimingsincethe19thcenturythatitwouldbepos-sibletofathomandunderstandthetruthwithoutvalue.Finally,HusserlhasseenthecrisisofthemodernEuropeansciencesjustintheir methodological efforts to mathematise the life-world. By separatingthemselvesfromthelife-world,theythengotlostinanegocentricconstruc-tionoftheworldview.Therefore,hehasdemandedareturntotheorigin.Inthis regard,we should agreewithHusserl’s insight.Our problemwith thetruthnowadaysliesjustinthefactthatsciencehassetitselfevenmoreapartfromthelifeworld.Moreover,thetruth,therefore,remainsmoreandmoreoutofreachofscientificobservation.Thatiswhywegettheimpressionthatweareincreasinglyfallingpreytothepredominanceofuntruth.

4. Neutrality of Science in the Search for Truth

Attheconclusionofhermasterfulreflectionsontruthinpolitics,however,HannahArendtsurprisinglystatesthatherconsiderationoftruthinpoliticshas been carried out beyond any perspective. She explained that she had“dealtherewithpoliticsfromtheperspectiveoftruth,andhencefromaview-pointoutsidethepoliticalrealm”.17Herapproachtothepoliticalfieldthussolidifiestheold-fashionedriftbetweenpoliticsandthetruth,whichmustbegraspedbyfactsorbyreason.Moreover,shedoessoaftertheshortcomingsofthedemonisationofpoliticshavebeenbroughttolight.Although the sphereofpoliticshas itsdignity andmeaning in itself, fromthispointofview,politicsisostensiblyattributedtothe“interestandpower”struggles.However,Nietzsche,Marxor thedoctrinesofpositivistpoliticalscientistscriticisethe“fatefulreductionofthepoliticaltosheeradministra-tion”:

“Inpositivism,whichtodaydominateslargepartsofthepoliticalsciences,thisoriginallyopencontemptforthepublicandthepoliticalhaslostitsphilosophicalbaseandisflattened.”18

Ontheonehand,thepassionateadvocateofvita activaadequatelyjudgesthedevastatingsidesoftheflatteningofpolitics.Ontheotherhand,politicsʼturntoaseparationofthephilosophicalstandpointfrompoliticalrealityandpub-licdisputationofopinionsseemstobecontradictory.Therefore,thequestionarisesastowhetherthetruth,whichitseekstosolidifyasisolated,canescapeallpoliticaldelusions.Whensomethinghappensintheshadowplayofhumanaffairs,itcanhardlyfadeoutthisrealityandappearancetruth.Itisaquestionwhetherascientistcanissuepoliticaljudgmentsfromhisivorytowerwithoutapplyingthesameperspicacitytohisownopinion.Philosophers,aswellasthegreatestscientists,arenotimmunetodeceptionwhenfacedwiththeperspectivesoftruth.ThiscomesclearlytolightinoneofArendt’sadmiredteachers,themysticalwizardofBeingfromtheBlackFor-est.Itshowshowadeepthinker,whenhestrivesfortruthandbelieveshecanfindit,canalso“err”.ArnoBaruzzihasexplainedthisconcernbyreferringtothe“matterofphilosophy”,tothenatureofthesearchfortruth:



“Thinkingthatistruecan,must,mayerr.Heideggerhasclaimedthisforhimself,inwhichoneseeshisgreatexcuse,whichonecanfinallycallalie,hisphilosophicallieinlife.”19

TheexplanationforthiserrorbyHeideggerisbasedonhisstatementthattheone,whothinksbig,couldalsomakeabigmistake.ForBaruzzi,itisnotjustacreedandlifeguidingprincipleofthelonelybrooderfromtheBlackForest,heassumesthisrather“asadifficultandpainfulmatterofphiloso-phyatall”.20Philosopherswhoare truthfulfromtheir innervocationfinditdifficulttoacknowledgethattheymayequallybesubjecttodeceptions.However,thisispartofthenatureofthetruthitselfandthefreedomofitssearch.Baruzzi thoroughlyexamined theopusof thephilosopher fromMesskirch,andwiththis,hedidnotwanttojustifyorexcusethefallaciesofthephiloso-pher.Thewrongdoingcannotbelegitimised.

“Wholies,muststillbecalleda liar.However, the lunacyof the truth isandremains that itshowsanddoesnotshow,thatitmaynotshowmoreinrevealingthanitshows.”21

Indemonstratingandrevealingthetruth,initsperspectivisation,thereisthedangerofcontagionwiththelie,thedeception.Whenquestioningtheself-containedstandpointofthelonephilosopherfromtheBlackForestandhisrelationtotruthandpolitics,itseemsrevealingtolookmorecloselyatthecorrespondencebetweenJaspersandArendtabouttheir colleague. Notably,Arendt’s assessment of the misleading teachingsof her philosophy professor can be enlightening.The two wonder to whatextent their formerphilosophical friend,ofwhom the twowere, justas ir-ritated,astheywerefascinated,hadtwisted“theessentialandtherealthingofphilosophy”.22InhisletterofSeptember1,1949,JaspersshareshishopethatHeidegger,whowascompletelyinvolvedinhis“speculation”,wouldnot“turnoveragain”,thistimeontherighttrack.However,Jaspers’judgmentiscriticalandsceptical:

“ButIdoubt.Canonebeanimpuresoul–thismeansasasoulwhodoesnotfeelitsimpurityanddoesnotconstantlypressoutofit,butlivesonthoughtlesslyinthedirt–canoneininsincerityseethepurest?”23

TheresponseofHannahArendt,forwhomthis“twisting”ofherteacheris“unbearable”deservesattention.

17

Hannah Arendt, “Truth and Politics”, Be-tween Past and Future. Eight Exercises in Political Thought,PenguinBooks,NewYork1977,pp.227–264,p.263.Onthistrack,JohnRawlsoriginallysoughttodesignhistheoryofjusticeonanideologicallyneutralgroundbeyondpoliticalstruggles.However,afterhis“Dewey Lectures”, he has transformed themetaphysical and epistemological interpre-tation of justice into a “political one”. Thetransformation of the questions of “truth”intotheconceptualityof“reason”undertakenby Jürgen Habermas was thereby subjectedtocriticismas inconsistent.Cf. JürgenHab-ermas, “Reconciliation through public useof reason”,Die Einbeziehung des Anderen. Studien zur politischen Theorie, Suhrkamp,Frankfurta.M.1999,83f.

18

H.Arendt,Wahrheit und Lüge in der Politik,p.91.

19

A.Baruzzi,Philosophie der Lüge,p.168.

20

Ibid.

21

Ibid.

22

Hannah Arendt, Karl Jaspers, Briefwechsel 1926–1969,LotteKöhler,HansSaner (ed.),PiperTaschenbuch,München1985,p.177.

23

Ibid.



“Yethelivesinadepthandwithapassionthatonecannoteasilyforget;twistingisunbearable,andtheveryfactthathedrawseverythingupasifitwereaninterpretationofbeingandtime,suggeststhateverythingwillturnouttwistedagain.”24

In theircriticismof thewayof lifeand thedistortionsof truth, there isnohintontheexclusivestandpointofthetruthseeker.Insteadofgrantinghimtherighttoanexternalivorytower,sheblameshisretreatonhisostracised“mousehole”.

“ThislifeinTodtnauberg,cursingatcivilizationandwritingbeing(dasSeyn)withay,isinfactonlyamouseholeintowhichhehaswithdrawn,becauseherightlyassumesthatheonlyneedstoseepeoplethere,fullofadmirationonpilgrimages.Itwillnotbesoeasytoclimb1200meterstomakeascene.Moreover,ifitwereso,hewouldliethattheskyisnotblue,andrelyonnotbeingcalledaliarintheface.Heprobablybelievedthathecouldcheaplygetridoftheworldinthisway,getridofeverythingunpleasant,andonlycreatedphilosophy.Andthen,ofcourse,allthistricky,childishdishonestypromptlystruckhimintophilosophizing.”25

FollowingHannahArendt,thephilosopherhasnoexclusivepositionoutsidetheworldinfectedwithliesanddeceptions.Ifthephilosopherbreaksdowntoofarand“placeshimselfintheplacewhereGodstandsinthemetaphysicaltradition”,26herunstheriskofneglecting,“fallingoff”andthuserringinliv-ingtogetherwithothersintheworld.Theroadtosuperstitionisthenpaved.MariaRobaszkiewitz tried toprovehowstronglyArendtwasdisappointedwith the contradiction between the philosophical pursuit of the search fortruthandthe“personalmendacity”ofhermaster.Thethinkerofbeingandtimehadbetrayedthelegacyinheritedfromthebeginningofphilosophy–thesearchfortruthofSocrates,whichArendtpointsoutasamodel.Accordingtothisthinkerheritage,itwouldbebetter

“…tohavemylyre,orsomechorusthatImightprovideforthepublic,outoftuneanddis-cordant,ortohaveanynumberofpeopledisagreeingwithmeandcontradictingme,thanthatIshouldhaveinternaldiscordandcontradictioninmyownsingleself.”27

Ithappensoften to the truth-seeker thatmostpeoplewouldnotagreewiththem.Whethertheycontinuetocontradicteachotherorbecomesilentisnotapredicamenteasytomaster,itdependsnotonlyonthepersonbutalsoonthehistoricalcircumstances.Apartfromthetranscendentalidealismofthisposition,whichPlatoplacesinthemouthofSocrates,RobaszkiewitznotesinitacontradictioninthecriteriaofArendt:

“OnedoesnotescapetheimpressionthatArendtappliestoHeideggerspecialbenchmarksthatdonotmeetherstandard.Herappraisalofhispersonandhisactionsisthusaffectedbyfeelings–whetherthoseofrespect,beitthoseoflove–andremainscontroversialinthisrespect.”28

Regardlessofthecausesofthisdiscrepancy,itisclearthattheproponentofthediversityofperspectivesinpoliticsdoesnotapplytheseprinciplesinallcasesequally.Aspecialquestioniswhathappenswhentheprivategetscon-fusedwiththepublic.ThiswasobviouslythecasewithHeidegger.IfwereachtodaytoHannahArendt’sreflectionsontruthinpolitics,itispre-ciselybecauseshewasabletoilluminateitmasterfullyfromherperspective.Inspiteofherdemandforaplaceofobservationthatwouldbesetoutsidethepoliticalfield,shealsowasbynomeanscapableofescapingtheperspec-tivesoftruth.Forinpoliticalaffairs,thereisapparentlynoabsolutetruth.Sheadvocatesamoreopenperspective,arguablymoreopen-mindedandfairertothatofherteacher,whowasluredintothelunacyofthedevastatingideology,ofthehistoricalandpoliticallie.



After all, however, it is only a certain perspective,which is by nomeansoutsidethepoliticalworld.TheperspectivefromwhichHannahArendtlooksatthepoliticaleventsisoutstanding.Shewasablethustodeliverapowerfulcontributiontothetruthinagón.

5. conclusion

Fromtheprecedingconsiderations,itcanbeconcludedthatthetruthhasre-mainedtoday,asitwasinthepast,adecisivestandardofevaluationofpoli-tics.Inthefaceofthedramaticdigitalaccelerationoftheflowofinformationandtheexpansionoftheradiusofcommunication,thetruthhasneitherblos-somednorperishedinpublic.Adulterationsanddeceptionsspreadmoreandfasterthantruenews.AsGeorgeOrwellimpressivelydescribedinhis1984 novel,thedystopian“MinistryofTruth”hasreceivedresourcesthatareevermorepowerful.HispredictionwasderivedfromhisexperienceofworkingintheBBCasapartoftheMinistryofInformation.Becauseofitsverynature,thetruthinthepresent,asithasdoneinthepast,onlyrevealsitselfwiththegreatesteffortandendeavour.Itneveroccurswith-outtheparticipationoftheobserversandbeyondanyperspectives.Thus,itisexposedtoaconstant“concoction”.However,withtheimpactofthenewmediaandinthedigitalage,thetruthhasnotperished.Totalkofanageofpost-truthseemstobeanexaggerateddystopianadjustmentoftruth.Moreo-ver,wecanargueaboutthequestion,whichagedemonstratesmorefriendli-nessoffalsehoodandfakenews.Iwouldliketoconcludethearticlewithtwosummarystatements.Thefirstshowsthatthemultipleperspectivesofthesearchfortruthinpoliticshavenoteclipsedthisfield;itbecameevenclearerwiththedigitalmedia.Obser-vational tasks have only shifted more and more from the collective to theindividualisticlevelandresponsibility.Andsecondly,Arendt’scritiqueofherteacher’sphilosophical“mouseholeoflies”hasstronglyconfirmedthatthereisactuallynocompletelyneutralandnonpartisantruthclaimintheassess-mentofthefactualitywithwhichmanyphilosopherssoughttodisguisetheiraberrations.Thedistancefromanimaginaryivorytowerperspectiveofsci-encecanonlyleadtotheauthenticnatureofthetruth.Initsfullnessandsplendour,thetruthisrevealedonlywithalaborioussearchandquestioning,aswellaswithanopenattitudeandneverwithoutpartici-pationandbeyondanyperspectivism.Politicsisnotinamoredifficultstatetodaythanithaseverbeen,norisitinamuchsimplerpositionintermsoftruth.The truth remains for politics a supporting ground and a permanentbenchmarkforassessment.Itcanbediscoveredonlyinitspluri-perspectiveappearance.

24

Ibid.,p.178.

25

Ibid.

26

Hannah Arendt, Was ist Existenz-Philoso-phie?,Anton-Hain,Frankfurt1990,p.71.

27

Plat.Gorg. 482b–c.Translation from:Plato,“Gorgias”, Plato in Twelve Volumes, Vol.

3, translated by Walter Rangeley MaitlandLamb, Harvard University Press – Wil-liamHeinemann,Cambridge,MA–London1967.

28

MariaRobaszkiewitz,Übungen im politischen Denken. Hannah Arendts Schriften als Einlei-tung der politischen Praxis, SpringerVerlag,Wiesbaden2017,p.96.



Pavo Barišić

Istina i politika u doba digitalnih medija

SažetakSve snažnijim širenjem sveprisutnih digitaliziranih društvenih medija, istina je u određenom stupnju izgubila na svojoj pouzdanosti i objektivnosti, upozoravaju danas pojedini autori. Kada neko razdoblje ističe u prvi plan napete odnose između istinitosti i laži, ispravnih informacija i lažnih vijesti, stvarnosti i fikcije, onoga što doista jest i zablude, to svjedoči o neprozirnosti i nesagledivosti zamršene igre u koju je zapletena javna komunikacija. Strelovit razvoj novih me-dija i digitalnih tehnologija uzrokuje dalekosežan proces promjena, osobito u području politike. U svojoj knjizi o »postistinitoj epohi« Ralph J. Keyes najavio je nastupanje »vremenā sklonih obmanama« (fib-friendlytimes)u kojima se »izriče više laži nego ikada do sada« (Keyes 2004, 4). Međutim, razmatranja u ovom članku počivaju na nešto opreznijem i kritičnijem pristupu. Ona govore u prilog razumijevanju pluriperspektivizma. Novi mediji zacijelo su donijeli izazove suvremenim komunikacijama. U političkim zbivanjima riječ je svagda o određenim perspektiva-ma i prinosima u stalnom agonu ili nadmetanju za istinom. Pri tome ne postoji posve neutralnih niti nadstranački uzdignutih zahtjeva za istinom, kao što su tvrdili neki filozofi i znanstvenici. Poradi svoje osebujne naravi, istina se može otkriti samo s prijeporom i trudom, a nikada bez sudjelovanja i izvan svake perspektive. Ipak, niti istina propada, niti ulazimo u razdoblje post-istine. Štoviše, možemo se i dalje prepirati o pitanju koja je epoha sklonija lažima i lažnim vijestima (fakenews). Politika danas nije u težem položaju nego što je bila ranije, niti je u mno-go jednostavnijem položaju u pogledu na istinu. Za politiku istina ostaje potporno tlo i trajno mjerilo za prosuđivanje. Može se raskrivati samo u svojoj pluriperspektivnoj pojavnosti.

Ključne riječiistina, istinitost, laž, lažnevijesti,politika,demokracija,digitalnimediji,post-istinitaepoha,pluri-perspektivizam

Pavo Barišić

Wahrheit und Politik im Zeitalter digitaler Medien

ZusammenfassungMit der Ausbreitung der Allgegenwart digitalisierter sozialer Medien hat die Wahrheit zu einem gewissen Grad an ihrer Zuverlässigkeit und Objektivität eingebüßt, warnen einige Autoren heut-zutage. Wenn ein Zeitalter die Spannungsverhältnisse von Wahrhaftigkeit und Lüge, Tatsache und Falschnachricht, Wirklichem und Fiktionalem, Echtem und Täuschung in den Vordergrund rückt, zeugt dies allerdings von einer Unabsehbarkeit und Undurchschaubarkeit des Verwirr-spiels, in das die öffentliche Kommunikation hineingerissen wurde. Die schwindelerregende Entwicklung der Neuen Medien und Technologien verursacht einen weitreichenden Wandlungs-prozess vor allem im Bereich der Politik. In seinem Buch zum „Zeitalter der Nach-Wahrheit“ verkündete Ralph J. Keyes den Anbruch einer „Schwindel-freundlichen Zeit“ (fib-friendlytimes), in der „mehr Lügen als jemals zuvor erzählt werden“. Die Überlegungen zu dieser Fra-gestellung in der vorliegenden Untersuchung sind jedoch vorsichtiger und eher kritischer. Sie gehen von einem pluriperspektivistischen Standpunkt aus. Die neuen Medien haben allerdings eine Herausforderung an die heutige Kommunikation erhoben. In den politischen Angelegen-heiten handelt es sich immer um bestimmte Perspektiven und Beiträge im ständigen Agon oder Wettstreit um Wahrheit. Es gibt dabei keinen völlig neutralen und überparteilich erhobenen Wahrheitsanspruch, wie ihn manche Philosophen und Wissenschaftler anstrebten. Infolge ihrer besonderen Natur entbirgt sich die Wahrheit nur mit Auseinandersetzung und Anstrengung und nie ohne Teilnahme und außerhalb jeglicher Perspektivität. Aber weder geht die Wahrheit zu-grunde noch treten wir in ein Zeitalter der Post-Wahrheit. Und über die Frage, welches Zeital-ter der Lüge und den Falschmeldungen(FakeNews) mehr Freundlichkeit entgegenbringt, kann man wohl streiten. Die Politik ist heutzutage nicht in einem schwierigeren Zustand als je zuvor, aber auch nicht in einer viel einfacheren Stellung im Hinblick auf die Wahrheit. Diese bleibt für die Politik weiter ein tragender Grund und ein dauerhafter Beurteilungsmaßstab. Die Wahrheit kann nur in ihrer pluriperspektivistischen Erscheinungsweise entborgen werden.

SchlüsselwörterWahrheit,Wahrhaftigkeit,Lüge,falscheNachrichten,Politik,Demokratie,digitaleMedien,ZeitalterderPost-Wahrheit,Pluriperspektivismus



Pavo Barišić

Vérité et politique à l’ère des médias numériques

RésuméAvec l’omniprésence généralisée des médias sociaux numérisés, la vérité a perdu de sa fiabilité et de son objectivité, ont averti certains auteurs de nos jours. En fait, quand un âge met au premier plan les tensions entre vérité et mensonge, informations correctes et fausses nouvelles, réalité et fiction, authenticité et illusion, cela témoigne de l’imprévisibilité et du caractère impé-nétrable de la confusion dans laquelle la communication publique s’est entraînée. Le dévelop-pement rapide des nouveaux médias et des technologies numériques est en train de provoquer un profond processus de changement, en particulier dans le domaine de la politique. Dans son livre sur « l’ âge de post-vérité », Ralph J. Keyes a annoncé l’avènement d’une « époque favora-ble au vertige » (fib-friendlytimes), dans laquelle « plus de mensonges que jamais sont racon-tés » (Keyes 2004, 4). Cependant, les considérations dans cet qrticle reposent sur une approche plus prudente et critique. Ils soutiennent un point de vue du pluriperspectivisme. Les nouveaux médias ont sûrement lancé un défi aux communications contemporaines. Les affaires politiques concernent toujours certaines perspectives et contributions dans l’agon ou la contestation per-manente de la vérité. Il n’existe aucune prétention à la vérité totalement neutre et non partisane, comme le souhaitaient certains philosophes et scientifiques. En raison de sa nature particulière, la vérité ne peut être révélée que par des controverses et des efforts, jamais sans participation et au-delà de toute perspective. Néanmoins, la vérité ne périt pas non plus, et nous n’entrons pas dans une ère de post-vérité. De plus, nous pouvons discuter de la question de savoir quel âge tend davantage au mensonge et à la fausse nouvelle (fakenews). La politique n’est pas dans un état plus difficile qu’avant, ni dans une position beaucoup plus simple en termes de vérité. La vérité reste pour la politique un terrain d’appui et une référence permanente pour le jugement. Il ne peut être découvert que dans son apparence pluriperspectivistique.

Mots-clésVérité,véracité,mensonge, faussesnouvelles,politique,démocratie,médiasnumériques,èrepost-vérité,pluriperspectivisme

Studies - Srce

Documents

Transcript of Studies - Srce