I’ve been thinking about the polarizing bias of opposing views. This bias can be extracting facts that support one aspect of an issue, while excluding those with a different view. This bias can be our individual perspectives: where we were born, family stories, level of access to goods and services, our education — all our “truths,” but not everyone’s truth.
How do we find truth? How do we find our shared humanity? What is it about being human that we can all respect?
It’s noteworthy that many world religions share a common belief: Treat people the way you want to be treated. Why do multiple diverse groups of people in the form of religious communities each describe a variation of “The Golden Rule?” Is the belief that all people deserve humane treatment a truth?
Recently I scanned the Constitution. Article I, Section 2 describes how to determine the population of a state: “by adding the number of free persons … and excluding Indians not taxed, three-fifths of all other persons.” The “truth” of the Constitution is based on a perspective that some people are “free” and worth more than others, that some people are only worth three-fifths of a person. We know this isn’t true. We know from scientific perspective that race is a social construct. “Three-fifths thinking” is a symptom of racism.
Our founding documents have guided our country well. Our founding documents have implicit bias. To reference another founding document, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal … ” This assumes that these “truths” are self-evident, but evidence says we need to vigilantly protect the equality and humane treatment of all people. To do so is a patriotic act —and perhaps the “Golden Rule” can guide us.
Robbie Murphy
Colrain