Everything about his legendary journey in this world.

03 August 2020

Communication and the Three Sieves of Socrates

Gossip - Do you really need to hear it? - YouTube

Communication is an important facet of our nature as humans and as a society. Our ability to communicate and share information has propelled our species to be at the apex of the hierarchy of life on this planet. The truth is in the absence of communication, this society that we live in today will fall into chaos. As such and by all means, we must strive to develop effective communication skills and exercise our privilege of free speech with caution and propriety.

The emergence of new technologies has enabled us to have more communication channels. Right now, we can communicate on a global scale through social media platforms and other technology-based communication media. What was before a nuclear skill has now become engrossed in a complex web of balancing between technology, censorship, free speech, cultural and racial appropriation, and a long list of important aspects that has now complicated the communication landscape. 

With the complexity of the communication paradigms today, it has become a necessity for us to develop further our communication skills. We must understand that our statements can now be easily subjected to public scrutiny. We must understand that now more than ever we must have sensitivity in delivering our message. There is a need for us to evaluate first what we are about to speak, and we must do this all the time. We must not let our emotions dictate what comes out of our mouth rather we must let logic, reasoning, and moral standards govern our statements.

How do we effectively do this? I believe the answer could be found in the story of Socrates and the three sieves.

One day, a man approached Socrates and was about to tell something about an acquaintance of the philosopher. But before the man could utter any words, Socrates asked him if he did let whatever he is about to speak pass the three sieves test. The man, not knowing what the three sieves are, asked Socrates to tell him about the three sieves test. Socrates answered and subjected what the man was about to say to the test.

The Sieve of the Truth

“Is what you are going to say the truth?”

Oftentimes, we forgot the basic principle that whatever we talk about, we should learn to fact-check and evaluate if it is the truth. We should not allow hearsays to be the basis of our statements. Moreover, there is no value in telling lies. The truth, regardless of how much you hide it, will always stand the test of time. As an old adage says, the truth shall prevail!

The Sieve of Goodness

“Is what you are going to say good?”

Speaking badly about someone will never do you good. We must always remember that we must exercise caution when we talk about other people and their affairs. We have no right to judge them and no right to assume that what they are doing is bad without understanding the circumstances that came before them. The sieve of goodness does not necessarily tell you to only talk of the good things but instead, it encourages you to talk good. And by that, I mean that we must always put the good of others and the common good first when we speak of something.

The Sieve of Necessity

“Is what you are going to say useful?”

If something that you will say will not be of use to the one you are directing the message to, then you are wasting both of your precious time. It is imperative that we consider the utility of our statements. In a fast-changing world, there is no place for those who are talking nonsense. Remember to talk less and do more.

Now that you have learned of the Three Sieves of Socrates, ask yourself. Have you been practicing restraint in your statements? Have you been responsible for what you speak? Have you thought of the repercussions of the words that have come out of your mouth? Always remember, you are responsible for those words.  Be mindful and always subject your thoughts to the Three Sieves of Socrates before you voice them out.

As an ending thought, let me reiterate that there is nothing wrong with exercising our freedom of expression, but we must remember that along with this freedom is our responsibility to be accountable for whatever we say. Until next time, adios amigos!

30 July 2020

It's not fake, but biased


The term “FAKE NEWS” has become ubiquitous in the virtual and real world that we thrive today. Because of how much we have bastardized the use of this term, it has somehow lost its essential meaning.

The not-so-trustworthy Wikipedia.org has the following definition:
 “Fake news, also known as junk news, pseudo-news, alternative facts or hoax news, is a form of news consisting of deliberate disinformation or hoaxes spread via traditional news media or online social media...”
But far from this, we see people branding news critical to a political faction or to an ideology they align with as fake news. This is obviously skewed from the above definition. News doesn't need to agree or disagree with your opinion. Moreover, news needs not to align itself with any political faction or ideology. Its mere purpose is presenting facts – nothing more, nothing less.

But a problem arises from this way of confining what news should be as all media and everyone around you are biased.  This may sound like a bold claim, but I see it this way. No matter how a supposedly neutral media entity tries and focuses on presenting facts, the people behind it and the media organization itself have biases. The truth is they protect certain interests. And mind you, this biased nature extends not just with traditional media, even social media and common people like you and me have our own biases. As much as we try to stay, act, and believe that we are neutral, we all are biased.

Now, this creates a dilemma. If the news in its purest form presents facts and facts alone, then a biased entity can't create news. This is the truth and its bad for all of us. However, there is nothing we can do about it. As such, I believe we must redefine how we see the news. News, for me, is an objective view of narrating facts based on the information one has gathered. Consequently, since our objective view is limited to whatever information we have gathered and one can't gather every information may it be subtly or largely influential to a news piece, we will be creating and consuming biased news.  

And it is with this dogma that I find it imperative that we do not stop evaluating our facts and do not confine ourselves to the narrative that we believe in. We must open our minds to every side especially when we are presented with new “facts.” And when we do this, we need not showcase hostility. There is nothing wrong with having arguments. An argument only becomes obnoxious when people twist facts and resort to logical fallacies to support them.

Lastly, in line with the allusion that news is always biased, we must understand that when a piece of news lacks or has more information than another one, it is not necessarily fake news but merely a biased account of appreciating the facts. Again, It's not fake, but biased.

And along with this line of thought rises new points of inquiry – What separates news from fake news? Is there a gray area in between the two? How do we spot fake news? I’ll try to answer these questions and more on future posts. Till then, adios amigos!

Wait... Here's an irrelevant quote. "The truth behind the lie is far more dangerous than the lie itself."