The word truthiness crept into the English language in 2005. It was coined by the satirical comedian Stephen Colbert. Truthiness denotes something to be true without any supporting facts or evidence. It was accepted as “truth” because it felt true or desired to be true. Truthiness is based on a person’s quick-firing gut instinct. Unlike the instincts of a Monarch butterfly, it is not based on hard-wired genetics. Instead, it is a learned, short-hand tool to understand the world. “Truthers” sacrifice factual accuracy and curiosity whenever the facts contradict their gut feeling. I use the term truther more broadly than just a person who believes the truth about an important subject or event is being concealed from the public by a sinister conspiracy. I define a truther as someone who routinely practices truthiness.
One of the philosophical theories of truth is the correspondence theory, which asserts that truth is achieved when a belief or statement accurately reflects the world’s reality. Truthiness does not need to meet this standard of truth since it does not rely on facts, accurate evidence, correspondence to the world, or logic.
Truthiness is based on a less rigorous investigation of the world. In an extreme case, truthiness can be based on what philosophers call solipsism. Solipsism finds “truth” in an individual’s mind since anything outside that mind is either non-existent or uncertain. By definition, there is no such thing as “group solipsism.” How can an isolated mind believe in the existence of other worlds in the minds of others? However, religions, cults, and denialists have been known to exhibit behaviors that reject the world’s reality in similar ways.
Truthiness results more commonly from our interactions with others, usually early in life. The truthiness habit is generally acquired from early family life or by early adulthood. Early social environments significantly impact individuals’ lives, regardless of their perception of personal mastery over life decisions. Truthers learn to ignore facts, accuracy, and alternative explanations. Ironically, despite a truther’s belief in his independence and self-reliance, he almost entirely depends on others for his “gut instinct” and truth. Sometimes, the turn to truthiness is simply an adverse reaction, jealousy, or resentment towards those who trust science and pursue a better understanding of the universe.
Truthiness is not a new phenomenon; it has undoubtedly been with us since the beginning of humanity. In the beginning, humans learned to hear, smell, taste, feel, and see dangers and opportunities. While roving around as hunter-gatherers, our ancestors had little time or the tools to study their native environments rigorously. Over time, they learned to avoid danger and find food, water, and shelter. As human living patterns developed, they began to live in communities and began to understand the world. Because of our relatively large brains, longer lives, and communication ability, we could teach our children and others what we learned.
Over the millennia, our cognitive abilities improved, but even today, the universe remains unfathomably complex. Individuals who focus on a few knowledge domains develop an expert understanding of their domains, but can arrive at tentative truths by eliminating many of the logical fallacies that retard the pursuit of truth. It is not surprising that many humans distrust experts and modern science. A science skeptic can always point to the past mistakes or uncertainties made by medical doctors, scientists, and other experts. They remind us that doctors once did surgeries without washing their hands. They also suggest that doctors are not as competent as we believe they are because they still have not discovered a cure for cancer.
The underlying context for truthiness is an implicit rejection of science, the requirement for accuracy, the search for truth, and formal logic. Why should a person search for the “truth” if “truth” is already known? A practicing “truther” confidently knows the “truth.” Moreover, a self-assured truther does not need to test his truths against competing truths because his truth is self-reinforcing. The truth is true because it is true and is usually based on a trusted oracle, written text, social conditioning, or groupthink. When a truther is asked why he believes as he does, he usually quotes from someone else’s beliefs. Truthers rarely validate their “truth” in their own words or by collecting verifiable facts for themselves. Despite their preconceived independence, Truthers need some outside credo or leader to guide them to their truth. Education, or the lack thereof, is not a factor in all cases. Truthers may have college degrees and successful careers. Likewise, raw intelligence (whatever that is) is not a factor. Truthers may score well on IQ tests.
In contrast, seekers of truth have a seemingly inconsistent attitude toward “truth.” Instead of being certain about their “truth,” they are inherently uncertain. They continually seek anomalies or imperfections in their understanding of “truth.” They try their hardest to prove their theories to be flawed. They torment themselves by second-guessing their assumptions. They seek the “best” truth, not ultimate certainty. Instead of ramming dogma down everyone’s throats, they want to test their theories with others. When a group of truth-seekers reaches a tentative consensus, it should be because their conclusions arise independently. They reached a consensus because the evidence led them to the same conclusion.
Truthers focus entirely on certainty. Certainty feels good to them. Evidence and accuracy are secondary, and psychological gymnastics can overcome any facts to the contrary. If the facts do not match their beliefs, they will tell the world that the facts are a hoax or use other psychological defense mechanisms. Many truthers cleverly turn science and politics on their heads. For example, it was common to see “My body, My Choice” signs to protest mandated Covid-19 vaccinations. Truthers also embrace experts with scientific credentials (often from discredited institutions) who hold fringe theories. Good science can be found from researchers in obscure universities and institutes, but there are charlatans, even with degrees from prestigious universities, who embrace anti-science theories. When reputable scientists refute a fringe theory, truthers scream “woke” and “cancel culture.” Instead of defending a fringe theory based on facts, accuracy, and logic, truthers resort to emotionally charged illogic and name-calling. They seek to remove scientists from positions of authority and replace them with trusted truthers.
A complex collection of psychological predispositions and life experiences usually underlies the distrust of science and curiosity about the universe. Instead of searching for universal patterns and better understanding, truthers live their lives based on the certainty of their easy-to-acquire gut instincts. Anti-science beliefs often stem from distrust in scientific research, difficulty understanding scientific presentations, contradictions with personal beliefs, and associations with other anti-science individuals. Truthers are more comfortable in their closed, anti-science womb than in the wider world of debate, accuracy, evidence, and logic.
It is not uncommon for American truthers to also mistrust the founding principles of the US Constitution. Just as truthers may ignore the science of vaccinations and global climate change, they also doubt the science from the government experts. If an anti-science expert says that 95% of Americans need to be vaccinated for Covid-19, many anti-science truthers will object. Their resistance to mandated vaccinations spills into other domains, including their voting patterns. Disbelief in science leads to support for anti-science political leaders. Anti-science beliefs often led to anti-democratic beliefs. And the downward cycle of anti-science continues.