For me, post truth is the belief that truth and lying don't exist or that the truth is less important than the belief. That's different from intentional and willed lying to get an end. They don't believe they are lying.
I once had a colleague who told me in very serious terms "the truth doesn't matter" in relation to his and many others shared perceptions of a political issue. I rapidly disengaged from working with him. It is deeply scary.
"I once had a colleague who told me in very serious terms "the truth doesn't matter" in relation to his and many others shared perceptions of a political issue."
It is rare, that you find someone to be so honest and conscious about it, but I found that most who are engaged with politics share that sentiment. The own side is right and the other side is wrong, just by general principle, not because of facts.
Doublethink is what Orwell called it. Being able to believe something, while rationally (potentiall) knowing it is wrong.
To be charitable he may have said it as a defence when challenged by an argument but he was serious. He might have been cornered and as a type of ego protection attacked Truth rather than admit psychological harm. I doubt he would state this view often and calmly in normal day to day living. Also to be charitable while many others would share the concern with shared issues I would think most would think of it as a traditional exchange of political beliefs and approaches rather than against objective reality itself.
It's worth considering that you might not have understood his argument. I had a friend who often had this issue, where if we started discussing something, they'd just endlessly pester me with "but why?" and then declare an "ego protection" when I inevitably said something that could be construed as rejecting reality even if that wasn't what the point was, and they weren't doing this maliciously, they just genuinely thought this way.
Eg if the discussion were about Spotify opposing Apple's exploitative fees, and my position were that it doesn't matter that Spotify is just supporting that position for the money, as long as it's aligned with consumer interests. They might've managed to pester me into saying "the truth doesn't matter" and declared that to be a fault in my position, even though that's a perfectly valid argument in this context.
> I once had a colleague who told me in very serious terms "the truth doesn't matter" in relation to his and many others shared perceptions of a political issue. I rapidly disengaged from working with him. It is deeply scary.
How many political topics can you think of that really are based on fact though? At the end of the day, don't they all boil down to a combination of opinion, personal preference, and morals?
