Balancing ’belief’ with ’knowledge’
Güncelleme Tarihi:
Oluşturulma Tarihi: Haziran 16, 2009 00:00
We at the Daily News are well aware that we live in an environment rich in conspiracy claims and counter-claims. Being the periodic subject of some of the urban myths that pass for truth has, perhaps, sharpened our sensitivity.
One recent discussion among ourselves produced the following insight. There is a great divide in Turkey between what people "know" as opposed to what they "believe." There is nothing inherently wrong with that dichotomy; all of us "believe" things that we cannot empirically prove or "know." The existence of a higher being might be an example.
The problem comes only when we become collectively confused about what we "know" and what we "believe." People in Turkey believe all kinds of things about the religious movement led by the controversial prayer leader Fetullah Gülen. Others believe all kinds of things about the role of the military in society or the so-called "deep state." Books like the "Da Vinci Code" make authors millions of dollars. In Spain or Italy, you can get as many opinions on "Opus Dei" as the colors in a work by the artist Gaudi. Open a conversation among three intellectuals in New York on the role of the "Trilateral Commission" and you will be confronted with at least six firmly held convictions Ğ all inconsistent with one another.
Thus one way to describe the role and mission of the news media is to expand the sphere of "knowledge" as opposed to the sphere of unsubstantiated "belief." Turkey’s passionate public discourse is, of course, a virtue in a democracy. But when colored by an excess of belief without knowledge, the result is a sort of cognitive dissonance. Taking public discourse to a more knowledge-driven level is of course difficult in an opinionated society. The journalistic equivalent of Hollywood food fight scenes that define much of our trade make matters all the more complicated. But this is our task.
A report in the feisty daily Taraf alleging a conspiracy within the military to "finish off" the Gülen movement and its allies in the ruling Justice and Development Party, or AKP, needs to be investigated. And it needs to be investigated to the satisfaction of those whose beliefs lead them assume the allegations to be true, and to the satisfaction those assuming the opposite. Given the history of civil-military relations in this country, this is no small task.
Similarly, an initial investigation by the military investigators that concludes the report is bogus will not suffice. Those early conclusions must be substantiated by an independent authority. And indeed, if the alleged conspiracy is as some now allege, a conspiracy to create an illusionary conspiracy, that that must be authentically proven.
In this instance, belief must be replaced by knowledge. Sanctions on the newspaper Taraf will serve no purpose.
The public must know the truth. This goal alone is all that should matter.
The problem comes only when we become collectively confused about what we "know" and what we "believe." People in Turkey believe all kinds of things about the religious movement led by the controversial prayer leader Fetullah Gülen. Others believe all kinds of things about the role of the military in society or the so-called "deep state." Books like the "Da Vinci Code" make authors millions of dollars. In Spain or Italy, you can get as many opinions on "Opus Dei" as the colors in a work by the artist Gaudi. Open a conversation among three intellectuals in New York on the role of the "Trilateral Commission" and you will be confronted with at least six firmly held convictions Ğ all inconsistent with one another.
Thus one way to describe the role and mission of the news media is to expand the sphere of "knowledge" as opposed to the sphere of unsubstantiated "belief." Turkey’s passionate public discourse is, of course, a virtue in a democracy. But when colored by an excess of belief without knowledge, the result is a sort of cognitive dissonance. Taking public discourse to a more knowledge-driven level is of course difficult in an opinionated society. The journalistic equivalent of Hollywood food fight scenes that define much of our trade make matters all the more complicated. But this is our task.
A report in the feisty daily Taraf alleging a conspiracy within the military to "finish off" the Gülen movement and its allies in the ruling Justice and Development Party, or AKP, needs to be investigated. And it needs to be investigated to the satisfaction of those whose beliefs lead them assume the allegations to be true, and to the satisfaction those assuming the opposite. Given the history of civil-military relations in this country, this is no small task.
Similarly, an initial investigation by the military investigators that concludes the report is bogus will not suffice. Those early conclusions must be substantiated by an independent authority. And indeed, if the alleged conspiracy is as some now allege, a conspiracy to create an illusionary conspiracy, that that must be authentically proven.
In this instance, belief must be replaced by knowledge. Sanctions on the newspaper Taraf will serve no purpose.
The public must know the truth. This goal alone is all that should matter.