"If something can be destroyed by truth, it should be" — Part 2.

Yesterday, I blogged:

I was surprised to run across this aphorism on Facebook the other day: "That Which Can Be Destroyed By the Truth Should Be." There were lots of comments celebrating this abstraction. I considered delivering truth that would destroy their bullshit celebration of a principle I doubt they believe.

Today, I must destroy my own statements with truth. I'm going to give this post my rarely used "I was wrong" tag!

I wasn't wrong about running across the aphorism on Facebook the other day, but I was wrong to remember "lots of comments celebrating" it. I merely imagined that other people would read it and celebrate it. My son John had reposted something he'd originally posted 8 years ago that passed along a post from Humans of New York. The Humans of New York post had a photograph of a young man with a purple notebook and this conversation between the photographer and the man:

"If you could give one piece of advice to a large group of people, what would it be?"
"If something can be destroyed by truth, it should be."
"I like that. Where'd it come from?"
"I'm not sure exactly. But it's really just another way of stating the scientific method. We shouldn't be clinging to hypotheses that are contradicted by observation.

John quoted "If something can be destroyed by truth, it should be" and he added it to a Facebook "album" of his that he calls "Intellectual Honesty." I'd say John is expressing some admiration for the adage. I have some admiration for it myself, but when you talk about destruction, don't you know that you can count me out in the abstract, I get suspicious.

There were 2 comments on John's repost. The first one, "Topical quote," is slightly celebratory, possibly satirical, possibly partisan. The second one "R'amen" is a joke that I get: It's "amen" for believers in The Flying Spaghetti Monster. 

So, clearly, truth has destroyed "There were lots of comments celebrating this abstraction."

A love story.

View this post on Instagram

“We worked together at McDonalds. I was in a deep depression at the time. It felt like my mind was dying. Hours passed. Days passed. I just tried to keep to myself and make the fries. But she was different. She was friends with everybody. Always smiling. Always blushing. Always talking. One morning it was snowing outside, and she walked in the front door, covered in snow, and she started dancing and twisting on the floor mat, and the snow was falling off her, and the light was behind her, and she looked like an angel to me. But we never spoke. Her friends kept telling me that she had a crush on me, but I was too shy. Sometimes we’d be at the same post together, and both of us would just stare at the computer screen. If we accidentally looked at each other, we’d look away really fast. Then one night we both finished around 10 pm and we sat alone in the break room. We started talking a little bit. She couldn’t sit still. She kept getting up and walking around the room. I told her that people were saying she liked me. She didn’t respond. She just stared at the wall. Then after a long time she finally looked at me. I put my arm around her shoulder, and we kissed.” (London, England)

A post shared by Humans of New York (@humansofny) on Sep 8, 2019 at 10:17am PDT

"I'm homosexual and I'm afraid about what my future will be and that people won't like me."

A Humans of New York photograph of a child that's getting a lot of attention on Facebook, including a response from Hillary Clinton.

I find this very touching — the boy, not HC getting into the picture — but I'm averse to giving children this kind of open-to-the-whole-world attention. Who is this boy? Who had the right to give the photographer permission to use him this way? Where did he learn to say "I'm homosexual"? I would think that a modern American boy who knew enough to be able to make that observation about himself would say "I'm gay," not "I'm homosexual." And why would a child who was that worried about it talk about it? What else did he say and what questions were asked that led to the startling nugget that became his caption? What other pictures were taken along with this sad-victim pose? Did he understand how any of this would work? Did his mother/father who presumably consented for him?

I love Humans of New York, and this entry is a huge success for it, but I question the ethics of catching a little boy up in a social media swirl, even though the response to the child is overwhelmingly positive, with many prompted to give the obvious response to "I'm afraid... that people won't like me": I like you! 

ADDED: This post gets my "using children in politics" tag. 

"I want to play in the NBA. Or be a mortician."

"Why a mortician?"

"I liked the way that my uncle was dressed at his funeral. And if I’m a mortician when someone in my family passes away, then I can take care of their body. Also my science teacher went on the internet for me and found out that morticians make $54,000 a year."

"My grandmother remembers the Arab world much differently than people view it today."

"She remembers a place known for its music, innovation, and intellectual abilities. I may be naive, but I want to help work toward unity in the Arab world — both between our countries and within our countries — so that we can get back to that place again."

"Hmm, should I listen to the old man's advice?"

"Or should I listen to 20-something douchebag hipsters who majored in film? I'm going with the old man."