The Wayless Truth
Updated: 2 days ago
What is a "Wayless Truth"? It is a special kind of truth that is encountered without the need for further contemplation or research. In fact, it is quite obvious most of the time, even though there are exceptions, which mark its uniqueness.
You don't need to figure out how coffee beans work in order to know that coffee can help you stay more awake; you just "know" it without a certain way to reach it, like a scientist or a philosopher need to do in order to find a revelation. It is what we call it either an oddly accurate intuition, or madness if we are biased by the need of a way to justify the founded truth/insight.
In fiction, there are certain characters with a very unique intuition, and in many times we do not demand of ourselves to know of their revelation, simply because it is known to us as well. It's what we call "breaking the fourth wall", AKA, reaching an amount of unexplained intuition required to know that a character lives in a fictional universe.
We do not ask of ourselves how that character knows that he is in a book or in a video game, because their knowledge is as plausible as ours, the readers or the players. That is a "Wayless Truth", a truth that does not demand a way for one to realize it.
We can learn from this concept something that is underrated nowadays: the fact that the way is insufficient for one, does not necessarily mean that the so-called truth is false. We do not demand of the meta-aware character in fiction to tell us how they know of a higher plane, because we are in that plane ourselves. However, if we were in the fictional world like he or she is, then we might question their sanity, or simply see them as eccentric.
Do you see the paradox? Our own demand for the truth, can sometimes steer us away from it, because we sometimes do not accept the validity of the way, in which the truth has been discovered (if there was a way at all). Being a skeptic does not mean being disapproving right away, but also being open minded enough to question ourselves and our priorities.
If you wish to be further opened to the truth, you must accept that it might appear even if the way towards it is not competent enough for your liking. Otherwise, you might distance yourself from what could've been a realization. Not all foods are tasty, but the best foods are those that satisfy your appetite; even if a meal isn't to your best liking, it is best that you eat it if you don't want to get hungry. Likewise, if you are presented with a possible truth whose way isn't to your liking, don't throw it away due to hasty skepticism or frustration, because then you might be missing out on something enlightening, nonetheless.
As with the fiction-based example, we can learn that our acceptance of possible truths depends on our position in life.
The same goes for deceptive lies and manipulations. Sometimes it is the weirdo who speaks the truth, while the well-appreciated figure of authority is in fact an ugly liar. Hence the fallacy of Ad-Hominem: it is what the person says that is important, not the person themselves. When the fourth wall-breaking character is right about being fictional, it does not matter how they are treated by the other characters, just like in real life, correct?
The truth isn't to be accepted right away for whatever reason, but there should be a "person" in your mind that says, "What if that is indeed the truth, even if the way is unsatisfactory?" The same thing should be said in the opposite direction! "What if that is a falsehood, regardless of the confidence and evidence presented?" Only that way, one come to a further realization of the truth, without being biased by the means used to reach it.
So, the next time you find a crazy man or woman talking to someone called "The Player" or "The Reader", don't be quick to make assumptions about anything. Being hasty is but the way of the anti-philosopher; the one who is unready to open up to new ideas -- any new ideas -- regardless of how nonsensical it may sound at first, at second, and at third.