We often say and hear, “I swear that I will tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,” but have we ever asked ourselves what truth is?
Hannah Arendt wrote in her essay Truth and Politics that truth is “the ground we walk on and the sky above us. It is the common world.” For her, nothing holds our world together without truth. Arendt believed in “truths” as the foundation of trust and meaning in our common worlds.
In addition to truth and facts, the contemporary public sphere—conceptualized by Jürgen Habermas as "a space made up of private individuals who come together as a public to articulate societal needs to the state" and defined by communication scholar A. Hauser as "a discursive space where individuals and groups gather to discuss shared concerns and, when possible, reach a common judgment"—has been infiltrated by post-truth politics and fake news, which now dominate discussions on politics and democracy.
Banalizing and Dramatizing Theories and Truths
Today, we live in an era where distinguishing between facts and falsehoods has become increasingly difficult. Nevertheless, fact-checkers and media experts work diligently to uncover fake news and hidden truths within daily political discourse. Scholar Antonella Besussi differentiates between "banalizing" and "dramatizing" theories concerning the relationship between truth and politics.
Banalizing theorists argue that there is no objective truth or objective facts. Instead, they contend that what we call "truth" is merely a subjective interpretation of reality, shaped by our perceptions and attributions of truth based on its effects—"considering what truth does rather than what it is."
In contrast, dramatizing theorists, like Arendt, do not rule out the possibility of objective truth. They believe that facts exist but argue there is an inherent incompatibility between truth and politics, with truth having no place in the democratic political arena.
From her perspective, writer and scholar Franca D’Agostini urges her readers to view truth as a conceptual function, meaning a quality that statements may or may not possess, rather than as a fixed substance that corresponds to a specific truth.
How Factual and Rational Truths Impact Democracy
In her 1967 essay Truth and Politics, Arendt distinguishes between two kinds of truth: factual truths, which are based on events and facts, and rational truths, such as scientific truths. She explores the complex relationship between these forms of truth and their role in political discourse. For Arendt, factual truths are simple statements that describe facts and events and are grounded in reasonable approximation, justified by common sense. Meanwhile, rational truths encompass philosophical and religious claims, such as "God exists" or "one minus one equals zero." She views truth as coercive, meaning it exists independently of agreement, debate, opinion, or consent.
Scholars who build on this perspective argue that, because truth is non-negotiable, it can be viewed as inherently anti-democratic, although the distinction between factual and rational truths remains essential. Scholars and philosophers emphasize that factual truths are crucial for the functioning of democratic power and vital for building trust, especially since they serve to counter falsehoods like fake news. In contrast, rational truths are seen as incompatible with political debate and democratic governance as they do not accommodate the plurality of opinions, which is a key pillar of democracy. When facts are not universally accepted and their authenticity and truthfulness are called into question, deliberate and systematic lying can infiltrate public discourse, undermining the foundation of political debate and breaking the trust people once had in each other and the political institutions.
While working on this article, Dr. Amro Ali, a specialist in political sociology and philosophy, shared an exclusive statement with Misbar. He said, "Trust is at the foundation of human relations, and without it, there would be a crisis in both the private and public spheres." Dr. Amro Ali explained that without trust—or in cases where trust has been broken, what he describes as a 'trust deficit'—both the past and the future would be irreparably impacted. Forgiveness for past wrongs would become nearly impossible, and any promises for the future would seem unthinkable. Trust, he emphasized, is the foundation upon which we build and reshape the world, driving humanity forward toward a better future.
In contrast to totalitarian regimes, the public sphere in contemporary liberal democracies, where free speech is guaranteed, allows citizens to discuss and compare various opinions on how to address a particular fact or event. Meanwhile, politicians can offer different strategies for confronting falsehoods and lies in the public sphere, as well as ensuring access to accurate and reliable information.
Other questions arise: Is it appropriate to apply truthfulness as a standard in politics? Do facts truly have a place in political discourse? When politicians reject facts, truth reasserts itself in the political sphere. However, factual truths are not derived from logical reasoning or reflection; they are simply observed or witnessed and accepted without question. Lies, by contrast, are often easier to believe than facts and, according to Arendt, can be much more persuasive.
In this context, the efforts of experts become vital, especially in an era where concerns about the damaging effects of falsehoods are increasingly prevalent. Scientists, politicians, and citizens all belong to the same human community because they share a common foundation of facts, which connects and unites them. Yet, when lies spread, it erodes the shared common sense.
The replacement of factual truths, essential for the functioning of democratic power, with lies poses a serious threat. It raises concerns that political discourse could shift from a democratic exchange of ideas to a tool of political domination. Political philosophy experts such as Federica Merenda agree that systematic and organized lying, accompanied by growing distrust in political institutions, could put politics and democracy in danger.
Read More
Study Shows That Most Americans Are Concerned With Fake News in the 2024 Elections
Research Reveals: Fake News Spreaders May Have Unusual Thoughts
