As humans, we are able to distinguish the truth values between different stories. Take of World War II or a story your drunken uncle tells you about the time he road Evel Knievel's motorcycle in las vegas. We are inherently able to tell which one merit's more truth. Thus, the human minds must have methods for determining truth.
Firstly, any story told of the past backed with empirical or observable evidence must be more valid the a competing story which lacks such. On account of occam's razor, one assumes that all evidence actuated from the event rather than the evidence be a forgery to promote a falsehood. As in the case of World war II, there is countless amounts of evidence to support it's truth. Such as, video footage of the war, military documents created during the war and terrain impact (i.e. the radioactivity and destruction of hiroshima), all of which are a justification of it's truth. In comparison to your uncle's story which has no evidence, the believability is significantly less. It's not to say that your uncle's story is entirely false, it's simple much less valid than other. Additionally, your uncle is the only one who vouches for his story's validity, leading to the next factor the mind uses to determine integrity. The more people to vouch for a stories truth, the less likely that story will be false. Individuals may be lying, or themselves have a false view of what truly occurred. As the amount of individuals who vouch for a story grows the likelihood that they all have a false view decreases (although sometimes there can be large numbers of people who all think a falsehood to be true but this is rare). An authority, i.e professor or an expert, may have a higher justification power than many people, if they are credible. In the search of truth, even though it seems futile at times, seek knowledge from many sources and perspectives, and always keep a slight amount of doubt in everything.
When the stories we believe stop making sense, it's crippling. For our very understanding of reality is vanishing. When the stories of the past stops making sense, we begin to doubt the ones who told us the stories and, when it is our mind who told us… we begin to distrust ourselves. Particularly in the case of false memories. A phenomenon studied in cognitive psychology where an individual remembers an event that never actually happened. These false memories can be triggered by someone else telling us we experienced this event or seeing false evidence of the event. In conclusion, even though events are more valid because if there's physical evidence to back it and there is a large quantity of people that support the truth. These factors don't make the story true but it may help us give some sense of truth to the past. Yet, sadly, because of our simple minds, it will be impossible to have an concrete truth of the past.
The world acts as a machine, with all parts, being ecological systems, social structures, industrial sectors, scientific studies, and spiritual transcendences, functioning independently. This grand machine exists on a scale so large that a simple human could ever see it as a whole, as we are merely miniscule components within it.
The machine contains many structures, such as ecological structures, factories and schools, all of which provide a specific function in the grand machine. The environmental systems, even though they are not specifically related to humans, show how individual beings can form a larger being. Coral reefs being a prime example, as they are made up of singular organism but can be classified in entirety as a singular functioning being. An ecosystem shows this to some degree but not nearly as distinct. Factories and other industrial institutions are the engines of this worldly machine as they support raw materials for everything else to function on. For example, the scientific institutions use materials produced in the industrial institutions. Schools and academic institutions are vital to the success of the machine for they nurture science and knowledge which leads to innovations which ultimately leading to improvement to the machine itself. The central part are the humans, the intelligent beings. Those who are the blood to an organism, the electricity to an electric machine and, for our case, the fuel by which this grand planetary machine runs on.
Although not all worldviews are valid in my eyes, I live in a certain way and thus I will view the world in the same way as I think. Since reality is perspective and what is within one's mind is the world. I have no right to dismiss other world views as less valid than my own. I am but one, and there are many who act differently and therefore, will see the world differently.
Our history unquestionably represents progress. If we look back a few lifetimes and see what was, we realize how much more there is now and how far we have come. We don't know the destination of our progress but we do know we are going up. Our progress shares many of the same properties of evolution. It must go up, it must be in a constant state progress, however small, and it must never retreat. We want to progress at a moderate rate, because if we accelerate too quickly, we collapse. When one studies the world, the sciences, the mind, the universe, one starts to realize how little we actually know. As the circle of knowledge grows the circumference of the unknown grows as well. Knowledge may be finite, and the circle of knowledge may at some point cover the entirety of the unknown. If this is the case, then when that occurs maybe something divine and cosmic will happen. The hand of god will reach down and bring us to the next world. Cynically, we can have a more bleak outlook. We hit the limit to what can be known, we will know all, we have no more to do, and that will mark our end.
The western world view lacks perspective of the world. This is mainly in part because the western world controls the media. So any source of information, be it magazine, movie or news, is created by the western world. Any sort of external affairs, if covered at all, will not be presented objectively and any individual in the western world has only this subjective source of information to feed their minds. However this is all changing as we live in the dawn of the information age, the rise of the internet and a global paradigm shift. An individual now has the power to learn about the world on their own terms and may transcend past this lack of perspective.
We are in our infancy as a species and our progress is miniscule in comparison to what can be in the future. We will have countless paradigm shifts in the future and hopefully we survive long enough to see our destination. The statistics on the dominant paradigms give us insight into the worldview of the west. The majority of the population are modernists, ones who want rapid change, and the rest fall under categories of traditionalists, wanting to live a simple life, and cultural creative, wanting change but at a slower rate. I would assume I live mainly as a cultural creative but also understand the benefits that come from the other worldviews. A traditionalist life would be much more peaceful and the modernist would be fully aware of the definite amount of time they have, thus the need for an accelerated pace. As I now know the paradigms present, I can understand where my choices are coming from. While also understanding the limitations to my choices and the benefits to an opposing choice. The modernist view which monopolizes the worldviews of the individuals makes our culture. It defines our fast society of instant gratification. The goal in question must be achieved immediately. Negatively, this leads to impatience and agitation of the individual but as a whole it's brings about innovation and progress at high rates. This progress, although quick, it's in-efficient and brings many negatives along with it. Since progress is made quickly, it's often poorly thought out and will be short lived. The term “disposable society” is greatly representative of the society which is built on the modernist worldview. Benefits and negatives come from this dominant paradigm, it will evolve into something better with time.
No, in no way at all can we know reality. This is fully in part because of limit of power our minds hold. Our minds are fairly simple and we only see a sliver of what is. If everything we have the ability to know is merely a sliver of it all, we can't truly know reality to the fullest extent. However, with all that, there may be a way to look into the everything.
To begin, our eyes and our sense can only detect a limited number of signals. Signals being the things we can physically detect in the world such as our senses and the elements of All the colours we see are merely a fraction of the electromagnetic spectrum. And that is only looking at the electromagnetic spectrum, there may be other spectrums signals of which our minds can't even begin to imagine. On a quantum level, there is a fundamental blurriness (a oversimplification) so that the position and momentum of a particle cannot be predicted with more accuracy that a quantum physics constant (known as h, which is a very small number). This destroys Pierre-Simon Laplace's scientific determinism, which states that if one could know the entire state of the universe at one moment with absolute precision, one would be able to predict where it was going. Since absolute certainty doesn't exist, because of this quantum blurriness, we as humans can't possibly understand the complete state of the universe. On complete contrast in physical size, we also cannot comprehend what is outside of our universe or any higher dimension. Leaving us only to study what is smaller than the edges of our universe and that of which is larger than the smallest components that make up the universe.
It is wise to trust science when studies conducted are unbiased, have had many peer reviews and are generally accepted in the scientific community. Even though it's not perfect for truth and future progress will come to discredit much of our modern science, the scientific community is generally in seeking truth. It's obviously wise to trust, at least to some degree, a social institution which, at it's core, seeks truth.
Reality is perspective, as mentioned before, and because so it's very difficult, if not impossible, to have a complete objective view of the universe as a human. As non-rational ways of thinking become belief within the mind, the creations of thought exist, in some capacity, within the mind of the thinker. Our methods for gaining knowledge of the world are inherently subjective because to observe one must interact with the system thus changing the outcome of that system. This is very present in anthropological studies or quantum physics experiments, where the things under observation are so fragile that simply observing it, changes the outcome. We, as humans, only know from our senses, which we have a limited number of, and therefore can't inherently know something because we only know something because of observations of that something. It's a middle step the limits us from true knowledge.
I had a critical re-evaluation of my memories as I experienced the falsification of one of an early memory which was deeply rooted in my mind. The memory goes as follows. I was a young child, probably around 7 or so, and I remember seeing a solar eclipse at that age. I distinctly remember looking out of a window and seeing the moon covering the sun with the light of the corona peeking out from behind the shadow. The image of an eclipse no doubt, but as the 2017 eclipse approached, I looked into the memory. When facts told me there had been no eclipse in Canada at this time I asked: why was this memory there? I had experienced a false memory, which until that point had just studied, and I gained a greater understanding of the fragility and malleability of memories.
The dominant paradigm will change with time. A length of time so long, however, that many human . As I discussed before, human progress acts in similar ways to evolution; it changes lifetime to lifetime and it takes lots of time, but there also needs to be something radical (a beneficial mutation) to start this change. It will take generations to adapt a new paradigm because they must make sure that it is beneficial, although it doesn't get passed on through survival of the fittest, there's a method for determining the benefits (still unknown and will come with further developments in psychology). Many people are dissatisfied with the idea that no true change will happen in their lifetime and that they are tied to the paradigms present. However, they may be able to witness the beginning, the revolution, the last straw. When the mental paradigm doesn't fit with the physical, revolution occurs.
I've been fairly content with uncertainty. Although I still deeply have the visceral unquenchable thirst for knowledge so viscerally present in our species. I realize that I am small and crushed beneath the weight of my insignificance. I realize that my life, as an individual is but a speck in the lives that haved lived and will live. But i see that our species is something more, that I am part of something greater that hopefully with grow and live on. In conclusion, to deal with uncertainty, I grasp for a true understanding of my cosmic insignificance, a true understanding of the our species as a whole and the feeling of hope. The hope that we will continue to progress into the future and into the unknown.