Bits of Truth

Yesterday I finished a book that I've been slowly reading for some months now. It was worth finishing, though its plot was a little patchy and perhaps slightly overblown. As is typical of most modern fantasy-type novels (heaven knows why - if Tolkien and Lewis were supposed to have launched the genre) it was impregnated with fairly obvious New Age messages that would at times be labeled as "preachy" if they were of Judeo-Christian origin. I didn't really mind too much, though I mildly dislike "preachiness" in all its forms. What I found interesting though was how many times I found myself nodding in agreement with almost all of a concept, or the first part of a conversation but not the end. Not so unusual really - we'd be a bit silly to assume that everyone that didn't adhere to our philosophy or faith is wrong about everything. But that seems to be the opinion of many people from a range of persuasions. They'll say that their way is the true way, and everything else is irrelevant and of no value. At the other extreme some will say that no one is really solely 'right' and that we all hold a piece of the truth. Let me suggest that there may be a middle road. Anyone who's been reading this blog for any amount of time will know that I believe firmly in an objective truth that we can know; I think there is Right and Wrong. But the cake of Philosophy can't sliced down the middle and divided neatly into those categories. There are bits and pieces that are true or false, not most whole idea systems. Most religions and paradigms have profound (though usually not unique) aspects of truth to them. Does this make them worth following? No, not really, but every once in a while these worldviews will reinforce or shed new light on ideas that I've long accepted but (because of their familiarity) not really noticed.