Thanks to the inimitable John Keats, we know that beauty is truth and vice versa. Is beauty the whole truth? Is it nothing but the truth? is it ... Ah! Did you notice? There are three things in question. MR Bodkin has a sense of completion already.
1) Merriam-Webster's on-line dictionary gives "fact" as the first definition of truth. (Just the facts, m'am?) In a court of law, one is sworn to tell the truth. Don't tell a lie. Somewhere, perhaps in a novel, I remember a man begging, "Don't truth me!" Since Google did not find this bit of arcana for me, it must not be a famous quote; but it has stuck in my mind like wayward poppy seed stick in the unguarded spaces between one's teeth. MR B knows the feeling of being "truthed" when the bliss of ignorance might have been preferable. Lawyers, one fears, do not really care, as a group, about truth, justice or, unless Clark Kent becomes a lawyer, the American Way. They want to WIN. They want to get PAID. If you don't believe me, Google the OJ trial and ask yourself what a certain lawyer (now deceased) cared about!
2) The whole truth might prove to be rather large and unmanageable. Perhaps truth is like dark energy, hiding out somewhere in the universe waiting to have its affect. What about in court? The lawyer asks the witness, "Did you see the defendant Elmer Schmidlap at the party?" The witness answers, "Yes, but ..." The prosecutor interrupts, as he/she is allowed, and will not allow the witness to continue to say, "but he was passed out all night on the floor next to the lime green davenport with the tomato juice stain on the middle cushion." Now, the davenport/stain-related truth(s) might, might have been quite superfluous. The truth that Elmer was passed out all night and could not possible have assassinated the award-winning pure-bred AHC-registered hamster would seem to be germane, however. Lawyers definitely do not always want the whole truth.
3) Is there really any harm in surrounding truth with a bit of local color? Did the davenport that is mentioned above detract in any significant way from the truth that was passed out next to it? Besides, since all that was, is or will ever be is intrinsically related, wouldn't the whole truth be unwieldy for practical purposes?
MR B is just asking. Just putting it out there. And that's the truth!
No comments:
Post a Comment