"NOT So Common Sense" - An Introduction

 

NOT… Introduction

Common sense, according to Wikipedia is sound practical judgment concerning everyday matters, or a basic ability to perceive, understand, and judge that is shared by ("common to") nearly all people. As usual Wikipedia misses the mark. What we use to call common sense is no longer “shared by nearly all people.”

It is the premise of this book that:

1.    in a post-modern reality almost anything that, in the past, was held to be common sense has been fractured and crushed in the name of a non-fact-based intellectualism. In short, acknowledged common sense has been replaced by acceptable common thought. Rather than unity in diversity, the expectation is uniformity without question or conversation.

2.   Esoteric thought and poorly constructed philosophical musings have replaced truth as the standard by which values and morals are drawn, if they are drawn at all.

3.   With the death of truth we find no facts to stand on. All foundation for any meaningful conversation is lost. Indeed, any value system: the law, ethics, the family, business ethos, journalism, religion, and life, all become valueless.

What happens to a culture when the law is constantly devolving, when ethics become an antiquated idea, when family is defined by one’s emotions, when a business loses its “brand”, when the synonym for journalist is lobbyist, when religion is rooted and dependent upon emotion, and life only has value if it is convenient and economically viable?

If you are a historian, you may recognize Rome in the previous paragraph. If you are a 21^st century semi-sentient being over the age of 40 you will no doubt, see America lurking in the shadows of that description as well. For those brilliant readers under the age 40, who are not historians, you may have nothing else in your expectation. This intellectualized standard less wasteland is your normal and without a referent, there is very little to disturb within your core. I want to challenge you to hang in there through the reading of this book. Imagine with me that absolute truth does exist, can be known and ought to be the standard by which all of life is valued and enjoyed.

One of the purposes of this book is to explode the myth that “relative truth” is not an oxymoron. It is one thing to espouse valueless idealism, it is quite another to live in a standard-less universe. We value the idea of total individual freedom, limitless liberty, until that liberty in another infringes upon our loved one’s safety or economic wellbeing. The practical reality of total individual freedom without boundaries is nothing less than anarchy-based survival of the fittest. It is this anarchy that has produced the norms in some communities of a total disrespect of police officers. We do not want them intruding into our homes, lives and communities – until someone that threatens our lives intrudes into those same areas, then the cries change to: “call the cops”!

We will here suggest that:

1.   in the war on plutocracy, anarchy is not the answer.

2.   In fighting bad theology, killing off thoughtful men and women of any faith is not productive.

3.   Screaming a lie, loud and often, does not make it the truth, only a more commonly accepted lie.

4.   Pragmatism does not equal truth.

5.   Truth is more valuable than pragmatism in solving any problem.

6.   Band-Aids are good for cuts, not so much for cancer.

7.   Fact based debate can lead to understanding… emotional arguments rooted in one’s biases or presuppositions only leads to divisiveness.

8.   Thinking is hard work, but productive. Blowing off steam soothes the ego, but seldom finds resolution.

9.   Whispered disinformation builds consensus. Truth and consensus are not necessarily synonymous.

10.                In a world of sin and corruption truth is not convenient, comfortable, nor without cost. ie: truth is inconvenient, uncomfortable, and costly.

11.                The lie is more costly.

The title of this book came from conversations my wife and I had over the last two decades. We would be discussing any number topics when one of us would say: “…well its just common sense.” One Monday evening sitting in front of a warm hearth my wife retorted: “There is no such thing as common sense anymore.” That phrase became a theme as we discussed a host of issues which included finances, faith, family, neighbors, world events, fly fishing, knitting and politics over the next 20 years. There literally seemed to be no place the death of truth had not corrupted. The Biblical question: “what is truth” has perhaps never been as relevant as it is today. I fear, however, that we have atrophied to the point that we find no value in truth, and therefor the question is not worth asking.

Common Sense assumes that facts matter, and absolute truth exists. When relativism and situational ethics became trendy in educational circles, eventually becoming part of our curricula in the 1960’s, the fix was in. The American Heritage Dictionary states that “Situational ethics or situation ethics takes into account the particular context of an act when evaluating it ethically, rather than judging it according to absolute moral standards. With the intent to have a fair basis for judgments or action, one looks to personal ideals of what is appropriate to guide them, rather than an unchanging universal code of conduct, such as Biblical law under divine command theory or the Kantian categorical imperative.

Notice the appeal to “fairness” and “personal ideals” in the dictionary’s explanation. Of course, the problem with this subjective analysis (situational ethics) is that each person has their own ideals and ideas of fairness. Left to situational ethics, judgement concerning any subject, at any time, within any context changes with who the judge is, as well as how the judge thinks and feels in the moment. One cannot be confident that the grounds upon which judgement comes will not change radically from day to day, person to person, or situation to situation. Indeed the entirety of situational ethics demands that the standards of judgement do change according to a designated judge’s observations and feelings of “fairness”.

Knowing the rules and establishing boundaries before starting any endeavor or engaging in any relationship is crucial to civility and order. Whether the subject is raising a child, running a business, living within a family or ordering at a restaurant, certain expectations are essential for sanity to prevail and profit to be realized. We will seek to show that any system where truth is devalued, and situational ethics are employed is inevitably headed toward anarchy, derision, and divisiveness within the ranks. Ultimately, if not corrected, morals and ethics find no foundation and the result is civil unrest, bankruptcy and/or war.  

In the “Introduction” to a book once read and treasured Thomas Paine wrote: “Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not yet sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favour; a long habit of not thinking a thing WRONG, gives it a superficial appearance of being RIGHT, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason.”

We have come a long way since the words of “Common Sense” rang true in the hearts of men. Perhaps what need happen now is determine if that way is right and true, and whether the destination has left humanity any foundation, practically, morally or ethically.