A famous catch phrase from the X-Files TV series about two FBI agents searching for evidence of alien life.
‘Truth’ is defined variously as ‘the quality or state of being true’, ‘that which is true in accordance with fact or reality’, ‘a fact or belief that is accepted as true’, or an idea of authenticity as in ‘truth to self’.
What all these are stating is that there is no empirical definition of truth – all they say is that ‘truth is truth’.
Many philosophical books and papers have been written on this subject, but they all point to one thing – truth is what we think it is.
Truth is not ‘out there’.
Truth in inside, ‘in here’.
Truth is how you and I perceive and understand things and situations.
Truth is based on what you and I individually see, hear, feel, taste and smell.
Truth is what we, based on our senses, believe to be ‘true’.
But then another conundrum arises.
Is something true because we ‘believe’ it, or do we believe something because to us individually it appears, through thought or observation, to be ‘true’.
Belief and truth are counterparts, in that we cannot believe in something that we don’t think is true and conversely, something cannot be true unless we ‘believe’ in it.
This is why many people struggle with ‘truths’ and ‘beliefs’ that are imposed on them by politics, religion, the media, and the systems of State including so called ‘education’.
There is no ‘universal truth’, there is only personal, individual truth.
Consider this.
You and I are sitting at a table having a meal together. You are on one side of the table; I am on the other.
What is the ‘truth’ of this situation?
I can see you sitting opposite me, I can hear the words you are saying, I can see what is going on behind you, the pictures on the wall behind you and so on.
You can see me sitting opposite you, hear the words I am saying, and see what is happening outside through the window behind me.
You and I are not seeing the same things, our truths of this occasion are different.
I am having a different experience to you, I cannot hear what I am saying (the sound of my internal voice is different to the sound you hear), I cannot see myself or what is going on behind me, and you are in a similar situation.
We are not even in the same place, your position in the universe is different to mine, we are facing opposite directions, we don’t know what each other is thinking, we are probably eating different food, and so on.
Our truths about this occasion are very different – ‘we had a meal together’ is as far as it goes, but that really doesn’t describe the truth at all.
We said different things to each other, heard different things, made different interpretations of the conversation, we were thinking different things to ourselves and drawing different conclusions about the truth of this meeting.
And there’s more.
A few weeks later we will go back in time and ‘remember’ the meal we had together.
What we remember in our conscious minds will be different to what ‘actually’ happened.
We may leave some things out, or even add some things in, and perhaps if we ‘remember’ the meeting after a year our record of the situation will have ‘developed’ further.
Our neural pathways change, they are not (as was previously ‘believed’ until quite recently) fixed or ‘cast in stone’.
We change our ‘memories’ all the time which means that we change our ‘truths’ all the time.
My ‘truth of life’, my ‘beliefs’ about life the Universe and everything, are different to yours.
Your ‘take on things’, your truths and beliefs, are different to mine.
We are told that there are certain ‘facts’ which we should believe to be true. At one time it was a ‘fact’ that the Earth was flat and stationary, and the Sun circled around above it. People were executed for refusing to believe that ‘fact’.
And we now believe that those people who still adhere to that ‘fact’ are ‘on another planet’ for not believing that the Earth is a sphere (or almost) and revolves around the Sun.
But their truth is their truth – for all we know they may be in an alternate Universe where their belief is a ‘fact’
What if everyone is in their own ‘alternate’ personal universe? Everyone has a different ‘truth’, a different ‘take’ on things and situations.
No two people can ever sense, understand or appreciate the same thing or situation at the same time in exactly the same way – everyone occupies a different space in the Universe no matter how close they are together physically.
Everyone is an individual, with their own truth, their own belief and their own individuation of the Universe. Everyone experiences the Universe in a different way – an alternate way.
Everyone, and every animate and inanimate thing is a separate expression of Universal energy and as so called ‘intelligent’ life forms we need to respect and understand that.
We each have different truths, different beliefs, and that brings responsibility.
You and I must ensure that our own truths are based on our experience gained through our senses and not ideas taken on board because someone else requires it or because it seems like a good idea or because others, ‘everyone else’, believe in a particular ‘truth’.
You and I must be ‘true to ourselves’ making sure that our beliefs and truths are really ‘ours’.
We must preserve and protect our own personal Universe because we are a unique and integral part of the whole. To do otherwise would disrupt and alter reality as it has done many times.

“You can’t teach an old dog new tricks” is a common ‘saying’ – well I used to hear it quite a lot during my childhood.

First, dogs don’t do ‘tricks’, they decide what they want to do, or not. They may decide to go along with some types of training, but they don’t do ‘tricks’.

This metaphor is really about people and is insidiously subversive.

It implies that people, as time passes, do not – or should not – learn new things.

It reinforces – or enforces- the status quo.

Once you’ve been through school and maybe learnt a trade or profession, that’s it.

‘Learning new tricks’ is not on the agenda.

And wouldn’t it be great for governments and authorities if that was the case.

Everyone under control and ‘in their place’, no dangerous ‘new ideas’ coming up and disrupting a ‘well ordered society’, whatever its orientation.

There has been a long history of repression of ‘intellectuals’ in both left and right wing regimes – not that there’s a lot of difference – in fact I’d really like someone to explain to me what the difference is between ‘left’ and ‘right’ as they both seem to seek power and control over ‘the people’.

Fortunately (sadly for those who desire power or control over others) this concept of stasis in knowledge and behaviour is entirely unfounded.

You and I know very well that we do ‘change’, we do learn new stuff, and we do alter our behaviour, and opinions accordingly.

We do learn ‘new tricks’.

But there is still this underlying idea that people don’t change and that organisations don’t change.

That because an individual or group has behaved in some way in the past, they will always demonstrate the same behaviour in the present or future.

This idea seems to be amplified when people consider groups like companies, political parties, interest groups and so on – they are thought to be more likely to be and do ‘the same’ regardless of the fact that the whole individual membership of the group may have changed causing it to be made up of an entirely different set of people.

To me this defies logic.

If the constitution of a group, in terms of its membership, the people who are in the group, changes that it would seem to make sense that the group as a whole should behave differently.

But that’s not common ideology and here’s the thing.

Because a person or a group has made mistakes in the past it is assumed, more than assumed, that they will continue on that path in the future.

But aren’t we supposed to learn from mistakes? Or maybe that’s just you and I – everyone else repeats the same mistakes over and over again . . .

Doesn’t make sense, does it?

You see, here’s the ‘problem’.

We are brought up and trained to ‘make up our minds’.

To take a position and stick to it.

To make decisions, stand by them and carry them out.

To change our minds is seen as a ‘fail’ – an ‘embarrassing U-turn’ – something to be ashamed of.

“You should have got it right in the first place”

It is seen as better, or more honourable, to carry on down a path that we know will lead to disaster rather than change our minds.

To be part of the ‘glorious’ charge of the Light Brigade into the valley of death rather than stopping to say, ‘hold on, are we doing the right thing here?’

That would be questioning a decision.

Which we should, frequently, if this was not seen as a sign of weakness, prevarication and not ‘sticking to our guns’ – wrong or right.

You see there’s a difference between decisions and choices – once a decision has been made, we have the option to choose whether or not to implement it, or when to implement it.

Because people don’t understand this they put themselves under massive stress and anxiety when they ‘make a decision’ that they subsequently know is ‘wrong’ but then feel they must carry it out because failure to do so would lead to them being thought of as indecisive or failing in some way.

The consequences of not carrying out a decision seem to be feared far more than the consequences of carrying out a totally bad decision!

Sometimes people will even say ‘well at least they made a decision’ almost disregarding whatever happened because of the decision.

So you and I have two options.

We can choose to defer carrying out a decision or not implement it at all – or – we can ‘change our mind’.

We can revoke the decision and make a new one.

We can choose to behave in a different way to that in which we have behaved in the past – different decisions lead to different behaviours.

Now this has a tendency to confuse the hell out of people. They can’t cope with the idea that you or I are behaving ‘differently’, ‘oddly’ or in my case probably ‘weirdly’!

So we do have to be ‘careful’ when we start to ‘act out of character’ because we’ve made different decisions and ‘changed our minds’.

‘Mind your change’ is a good way of putting it, or perhaps manage your change.

Manage how you do those ‘new tricks’ that you’ve decided on. Make sure people understand that this is really you.

That you’re not ‘out of your mind’ you’ve just upgraded it.

‘You have 7 seconds to make a ‘first impression’ on someone’
‘70% of the buying decision is in the headline’
These are two of many expressions about what happens ‘first’ when you or I meet someone or read something.
There is also a ‘theory’ that once a ‘first impression’ has been made its very difficult to change the perception you have of that person or subject.
Personally, I’ve found this to be completely untrue as when I’ve ‘investigated’ further I’ve frequently changed my ‘impression’ – not always but frequently.
Alongside this though are the situations when the first impression is so ‘strong’ that we decide not to ‘investigate’ further and go with our initial perception – good or bad.
This idea sounds simple, but it isn’t.
There is a multitude of circumstances that can affect our first impression of something whether that be a person of a ‘headline’.
And headlines of course don’t always relate to a product or service sales situation. Headlines relate to politics, ideology and many other things – but actually when it boils down to it, it’s a ‘buying’ decision.
We ‘buy in’ to a particular ideological or political idea or proposal and what we ‘buy into’ is what we end up choosing to believe based on those initial impressions – until of course we investigate further if that’s what we choose to do.
Just look at some of the newspaper headlines around today – what impression are they designed to make?
(You could compare them with some mid 1930s German headlines – no don’t, it’s too scary)
Listen to some of the ‘sound bytes’ on the radio or TV – what impression are these people trying to make?
Look at the headlines in advertisements, on Facebook, on email marketing and in media advertising – what are they pitching?
They are all looking to grab your attention and instil a particular desire or point of view.
That of course is what marketing and copywriting is all about – to get you and I to buy in to whatever it is that’s being ‘sold’.
But headlines and sound bites are one thing, what about you and I?
What about the impressions we make?
There’s an old saying – ‘You can’t judge a book by its cover’ and that applies to headlines and people as well as books!
Writing headlines and constructing speeches is a deliberate activity. Hours can be spent crafting the right headline or the right form of words to ‘grab the hearts and minds’ of the audience.
But ‘copywriting’ the ‘first impressions’ we make as individuals doesn’t often happen.
Politicians, leaders and people who make their living ‘on stage’ take a lot of time ‘copywriting’ not only what they say but also their ‘image’ – a classic example is the ‘image’ of Margaret Thatcher before and after her election as Prime Minister. A lot of time and effort was put into that.
But do you and I regularly think about how we are perceived by others?
Do we consciously think about it at all?
There are occasions from time to time when you or I desire or need to ‘make a good impression’ on some other person or people, but what does that mean?
What do we do to make that ‘good impression’?
‘Impression’, good or otherwise has everything to do with perception – and the same applies in a different way to copywriting.
Perception is how we perceive the world around us and as I discussed when talking about truth, no two people ever, ever, ‘see’ or perceive the same thing.
Even when you look in the mirror, you don’t see what other people see, the voice that you hear is not the voice that other people hear, and these are the first obstacles to ‘making a good impression’.
To some extent when we attempt this we are ‘flying blind’ – you and I cannot see how we really look to others or hear how we really sound.
Everyone has a different view of the world around them, we all ‘see things differently’.
What this means is that in making a good impression on one person you may not be doing so for another as they see you from a different ‘angle’.
Many people spend a lot of time and effort trying to ‘impress’ – they usually succeed – but they have little idea of what impression they are making on each individual they meet.
Usually this is the result of a need to associate with people they would like to emulate or be ‘recognised’ by, but it rarely succeeds in making a good impression on those people; rather the people trying to impress just become one of the entourage although they may feel they have succeeded.
So how does one make a good impression, and importantly a good first impression?
Rule number one is to stop attempting to impress and reverse the situation.
What matters is not so much the impression you make on others but the impression they make on you.
You are the most important person in this game, not someone else.
But there’s a subtle twist.
‘Impressive’ people are not consciously intending to impress anyone, some are actually quite shy and private – I’m talking about successful and charismatic people, people who ‘stand out’.
Those who I have met are never looking to impress, but to be impressed – and they are not impressed by people why try to impress them, but by people who are impressive in themselves.
People who ARE themselves – people like you and I
So the secret is that the only person you need to impress is yourself.
Just one more thing . . .
We must impress ourselves all the time and to do that we need to be alert and aware of what is going on around us at all times and who is around us at all times.
Because you never know who is watching.