Makoto Fujimura, a modern-day artist, author, and speaker, recently delivered a speech

about how America is politically headed down a bad path which desperately needs to be fixed.

He said we will reach the point - some are already at the point - where opposing sides get

offended when the other side simply tries to defend or explain what their beliefs are. We need to

be able to listen - we don't have to accept it as truth - to a viewpoint which doesn't match our

own, and have a civil conversation about it. Fujimura emphasized "it's not which side wins or

loses, it's how we talk about it." What one person sees as the truth may not be the same as what

another sees as the truth. This fact does not need to impede listening or communication between

parties because we should have enough decency to listen to and learn about a viewpoint we don’t

agree with. Truth in every aspect of our lives starts out as what we are taught, but develops

further into something new if we are open-minded enough to allow acquired experiences to mold

us.

A central idea in Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave” is that an individual’s idea of truth arises

from what they first learn, and it can then be difficult to change it. In this reading, a group of men

lived in a cave for the entirety of their lives. Every day, they watch shadows projected onto the

wall in front of them parade by, oblivious to the objects which create these shadows because all

they can see, and have ever seen, are the shadows. When one of the men escapes and experiences

the outside world for the first time, it is a shock. At first, he does not believe what he is seeing

because it doesn’t align with his truth of the shadows he grew up comprehending. Eventually, he

begins to understand the real world and he accepts this new truth. However, when he returns, the

other cave dwellers refuse to believe or acknowledge this new (and correct) view he tells them

about. The issue is that what the enlightened man told them went against what they’d always
known - what was their truth based on their limited experience. It is hard for anyone to let go of

something that they believe is fact based on their understanding.

Rene Descartes’ “Excerpt from Meditations on First Philosophy” highlights how the

concept of the “Allegory of the Cave” describes the beginnings of life. Descartes’ piece follows

his spiraling thoughts as he questions, first, how it is possible for him to know anything with

absolute certainty, and eventually his existence altogether. Descartes remembers “how numerous

were false opinions that in [his] youth [he] had taken to be true” (Descartes 118). Part of our

parents’(or whoever raises us) job is to teach us how to live. They are likely to project the way

they live - their opinions, their religions, even the sports they played - onto the child. Whatever a

child grows up “knowing” from experience and what they have been taught is what they consider

to be the truth. Especially when they’re young, their parents are the most important people to

them and they’ll want to be like them (“I’ve Been Watching You”, Rodney Adkins watch). As

kids grow up and experience the world for themselves, which includes encountering new

opinions, they will start to re-examine their existing beliefs and form their own, if they’re open

minded enough; with everything new that college brings, it’s one of the biggest avenues for this

process.

Plato’s “The Apology” introduces how people, in a sense, blindly, believe the truths their

parents, culture, and experience pass on to them. This piece tells of Socrates’ court case where

he’s accused of tainting the youth with his ideas; he presents to the court his conclusion that he is

wise because he is fully aware that he doesn’t know everything and more importantly doesn’t

pretend that he does, like everyone else. Plato quotes Socrates’s statement “no one knows

whether death may not be the greatest of all blessings for a man” to ground this point (Plato 90).

There is no hard evidence of what awaits the human race after death; it could be a wonderful
experience (the idea of a Heaven), a terrible experience (the idea of a Hell), an experience of

starting a new life all over (the idea of reincarnation), or nothing at all. There’s no scientifically

based way to know, but there is faith. It can be expected that a child will adopt faith if their

parent is a believer, again because that is what they are first taught. One is likely to believe death

is “the greatest of all blessings” if that’s what they are taught to believe, even without evidence.

This concept is not limited to religion, however; its applications are endless. If a parent teaches

their child “black people are bad,” that is what they are going to believe. If a parent teaches their

child orange is called purple, that is what they are going to believe. The children will believe

whatever they are told without evidence because they do not know any better, until they are

exposed, see for themselves, and hear other opinions, then they might find a new truth.

Rafia Zakaria’s “Veil” is a memoir that explores the idea presented in the “Allegory of

the Cave” in a real-life manifestation. Zakaria wrote about the man who accused her of being

"inadequately Muslim simply because [she] did not fulfill his idea" of a veiled Muslim woman

(Zakaria 147). This stranger mistook his personal truth to be the equivalent of reality. Zakaria

told him she was Muslim, and he argued with her that this was “impossible” since “Muslim

women are required to wear a veil,” a concept he learned to be true or surely he would not have

insisted (Zakaria 147). As displayed here, this man's idea of "Muslim," and that one can identify

a Muslim woman as such by her head scarves, is not the complete truth. Zakaria, being a Muslim

woman herself, knows that the actual truth is that garments, and specifically the veil or hijab, are

not a requirement for being a practicing Muslim woman. Zakaria does not report that the man

ever agreed with her or acknowledged her/the truth, only that he rudely “smiled glibly” for the

duration of the conversation - not a sign of respect (Zakaria 147). Even direct experience is not

enough to counter flawed truths if we’re not open minded enough.

 Walt Whitman’s “O Me! O Life!” transitions away from illustrating individual

experiences, truths, and beliefs to why people shouldn’t be stuck in their untested beliefs. In the

introduction to this poem, Whitman states, “we often learn important things about the world

when we look through someone else’s eye” (Whitman 177). We can gain knowledge when we

look from someone else’s viewpoint because of the chance they have a different truth than we do.

The truths of others hold the potential to be more accurate than our current truth. Consider if the

cave dwellers would have listened to the adventurer; they would have learned the factual truth.

There is also, however, the chance that the new version of truth we hear will not prove any more

correct than ours. Nevertheless, being able to listen to someone else’s point of view and attempt

to understand them - regardless of whether we ultimately agree - is a valuable, and courteous

skill to have; a skill that many people struggle with today (such as the man in Zakaria’s story),

and one that Fujimara argues we need desperately.

Donald R. Prothero and Timothy D. Callahan’s “Science and the Paranormal” expands on

the theory that everyone can learn from discovering that their truth is partial or false. The authors

note that “there are many hypotheses... which are wrong...; they’re the aperture to finding out

what’s right” (Prothero, Callahan 221). In science, finding out what is wrong is considered to be

a step closer to, even the path to, being right. Society conditions people to associate being wrong

as a negative thing, which makes sense in a way. Starting at a young age, a child writes the

wrong answer on the worksheet, and gets points taken away. They may have wanted a perfect

grade, but they can learn from even these wrong answers if they are open to learning.

We can learn from being wrong in areas ranging from school subjects to science, and any

knowledge areas in between. We have to realize being wrong isn’t necessarily bad, because it

promotes growth and improvement, if our mind is open to accepting it. In Mark Edmundson’s
“Who Are You and What Are You Doing Here?” he states that he desires “to be thrown off

course” (Edmundson 38). Edmundson possesses the rare trait of wanting to have his mind

changed. Edmundson isn’t stuck in his truth; he’s not afraid of being wrong; he craves learning

“another, better way” (Edmundson 38). His mindset is superior because it encourages listening to

what others have to say instead of immediately shutting them out when we hear something that

doesn’t agree with our views. If we block them out, we will miss opportunities to learn, and will

also fail to be an open minded, accepting, and decent human being in the process.