“Layers of truth” is the name of an idea that I had a few months ago. We define truth, or right and wrong, based on the knowledge we have of circumstances comprising a situation. However, this knowledge we have may expand, as the tiny little interior blue ring expands in the outermost pink ring. Through this expansion, as more circumstances become know, truth, or right and wrong, may vary. For example, I present you with the statement “I’m not guilty – You are!” There are some circumstances, or reasons, on which I base this statement. Nevertheless, as people are imperfect, there is no guarantee that the circumstances I have highlighted in the first statement are all the circumstances that are important in the situation: there may be some that I have overlooked. Later, when some these circumstances become known, they may alter the first statement, and could make it look like “I’m guilty – You are not!”
I think this process may continue on and on, and every new fact or circumstance concerning a hypothetical situation may alter people’s perception of truth, or right and wrong.
There are two reasons, because of which I was able to think of the idea: the first reason is quarrels between people at school, and the second is action movies.
When I’m having classes, sometimes an argument between two or more of my classmates arises over some deed. Basically, one person blames another for having undermined the former’s performance or image in front of others. Anton is angry, because another one, Maria, diminished the chances of Anton to look good, smart, handsome, etc. Anton blames the latter person of evil deed; Maria is the evil doer in the eyes of Anton. However, Maria doesn’t regard herself as a bad person, and thinks Anton is accusing her for unreal things. Of course, there may be circumstances with which Anton is not acquainted, which pushed Maria to act in a certain manner. If later these circumstances become known, Anton understands that he was in the wrong: there is a shift – Anton becomes the bad guy, for having accused Maria. Nevertheless, even later on, it may become clear, that the circumstances that forced Maria to act in some way, were actually her fault, and that Anton was actually in the right, and the whole thing could go on indefinitely, in theory.
The second source of the idea is the number of action movies, in which the backgrounds of the protagonists and antagonists are revealed gradually.
The pattern, I believe, is as follows: Everyone is living peacefully in the city, while the villain is plotting his master plan for making the carefree people suffer. The villain is on the loose, when finally a hero appears to stop him. However, later we understand that the villain’s father was a good-willed person that eventually was swindled by some of the antecedents of the people living in the city in question. In that case, the villain is in his right to be angry and to want a payback, and then there is a series of plot-twists.
All I want to say with this article, is that I believe that there is no way a person can be one hundred per cent sure if he is in the right (unless speaking of truths accepted by convention, such as the order of digits, or the names of the colors).