Seek what is true
As your perception of what is true may be incorrect (for whatever reason: other men or women trying to fool you; you are missing a piece of information; you didn’t bother understanding, etc.), there may be a need for you to seek what is true.
What is true is here; it is somewhere. One of your options is to try to find it. You may think that finding it is a tremendous job. It can be a complex puzzle to assemble, but we suggest some tips on this page. We extracted them from the actions of women/men who had already worked hard to reach what was true.
We talk about what is true and not the “truth” because the truth is merely a man's or a woman's (wo/men) opinion of what is true. True is based on pieces of evidence. Ask the system (Department of Justice, president, lawyers, etc.) what " truth " means. You will be amazed.
A note that in this section, we are not talking about predicting whether a forecast (something happening in the future) is true or not
When do we need to seek what is true?
It is a fundamental question you may want to ask. From what we observe, there is a need to seek what is true if the answers to the questions below (also mapped on the graph below) are located inside multiple red bubbles.
Three fundamental questions:
How much transparency on facts do we have?
Questions that can help you answer: does the process provide a high level of transparency? Does the process offer traceability of events? Do People openly share information transparently?
Full transparency: facts and/or events are traceable, and there are recordings (video, image, audio, etc.) of the facts
Low to no transparency: no traceability of facts and/or events, no recording of the facts.
To what extent does the main narrative align with facts?
The question that can help you answer is: Is there evidence of misalignment between the main narrative and facts?
For example, he says they did this, but the video recording doesn’t support what they state.
Complete alignment: the narrative fully matches the facts. For example, he is saying this football player scored a goal during the match, and there are multiple video recordings of this football player scoring a goal during this specific match.
Low to no alignment: evidence of significant misalignment(s) between the facts and the narrative.
How many roadblocks are encountered to access facts?
Questions that can help you answer: Do People or processes prevent you from accessing facts? Are People, or even yourself, threatened or intimidated from accessing the truth? Is any “authority” trying to sidetrack your access to the facts?
Numerous roadblocks: People or processes deter you from accessing facts. Facts that should be available in the interest of People are classified as protected in the interest of a relatively small group of People. The more you progress, the more the cost (in terms of time, money, and effort) of accessing the truth increases. Facts are suddenly lost or not destroyed, and People are told that they cannot be accessed anymore.
Very few to no roadblocks: People can access facts without any difficulties. The time, money, or effort needed to access facts is very low (going to a website, for instance, and easy access to facts).
We identified two complementary questions.
What is the potential gain for the People driving the main narrative?
One woman/man or a group can drive the main narrative. If it is driven by many women/men, find out who the source of this narrative is. Is this wo/men or a group of wo/men already gaining something (wealth, influence, power, …) from the narrative?
Is the main narrative seeking someone/People to do something?
Who is the narrative directed to? For instance, is it directed to women/men from a specific country or age group? Is the narrative seeking specific action from these wo/men? Is the main narrative seeking to set women/men in a certain mindset so that they go toward specific actions? For instance, is the narrative seeking to develop women/men in a fear mindset?
I invite you to pick an example (something that happened or is happening) and apply these questions to your example.
Principles to reach what is true
Factor in your intuition
Ask yourself, or the group of wo/men you are part of, where could we find what is true?
Ask what is the minimum effort required to reach what is true.
Start from a hypothesis. Very effective.
Assume this hypothesis is correct. What should happen?
If needed, assume that what should happen happened
Can you find evidence of what should have happened?
Similar information from several non-related sources indicates that you must dig further and could be on the way to uncover what is true about something.
If anything or anyone tries to derail you on your journey towards what is true, it is a signal that there is something to uncover
Ask yourself if there is a Pareto rule where 20% of something could contribute to 80% of something else.
Listen to women/men very carefully.
Researching what is true
Hereunder are guidelines to research what is true. These guidelines mostly rely on the above principles.
What is your intuition (gut feeling) telling you?
Your intuition is a starting point. See it as your experiences, skills, and brain firing in a split second and helping you to deal with your situation (or not helping you if you do not have any intuition).
Please make use of your intuition, factor it in, and don’t suppress it. Does your intuition tell you that a statement is correct or is incorrect? CNN tells you “The 2020 US presidential election was the most secured election ever”. What is your intuition telling you when you hear this? According to your intuition, if you think this statement is incorrect, where would you look to find facts supporting that this statement is incorrect?
Where is what is true?
It does sound like a dumb question. Remember one of Peoplelyzer’s most fundamental principles: asking the most basic questions. Yes, we follow our principles, and there is no dumb question. Asking about the location of what is true is fundamental and it may save you a significant amount of time if you spend the time to ask this question to yourself and the women/men around you.
You are not looking for what is true directly. You are looking for tangible physical facts that support whether a statement about these facts is true or false.
What is true is somewhere.
Let’s use the below graphic for you to understand what we are saying. Imagine each blue dot is a fact (I eat a salad, he changes his clothes, she says hello, …). Facts can connect, which is why you can see some green lines between blue dots. For example, you had an emergency call from a family member and took your car to drive to your uncle’s place. These two facts, the call and you driving your car, are connected. Then, imagine a statement is made. For instance, you hurt a pedestrian while driving your vehicle. Then, among all the blue dots, the goal is to find whether we can find one or more facts that support this statement. If the statement is true, then the yellow dots would be facts that support this statement. These yellow dots are located somewhere (street video recording, marks on your car, …). Other blue dots would not have any link with this statement.
How can we find those yellow dots?
Facts happen, and facts may leave traces. Unfortunately, we cannot go back in time and get multiple opportunities to observe the original facts from our own eyes to confirm whether something is true. However, facts may have been captured somewhere. Here are examples of where facts may have been recorded:
Video (CCTV, surveillance camera, …)
Image (satellite picture, CCTV, photo, …)
Audio (voice message, phone tapping, …)
Written content (paper-based, such as contracts; digital, such as computer logs, text messages, etc.)
People’s minds (memory)
Using our earlier example, let’s imagine that a CCTV camera did capture a trace of the fact that your car hurt a pedestrian.
Factor in that these physical things can be altered through time (a CCTV recording may be deleted, a woman/man’s memories may fade away). They may also still exist right now. They may still live in a place that no one has thought about. No one has thought about looking there. Try to think outside the box to identify such places; we advise you to brainstorm with other women/men on this question: Where could we find what is true?
Start by brainstorming with a group of People, preferably People from very diverse backgrounds and professions, and list ideas about where facts could have been captured. Once you have this list, collectively identify 2 or 3 areas you will research.
What is the minimum effort required to reach what is true?
Before starting any task/job, it should be one of your reflexes to control the energy you will deploy to do that job. Ask what is the minimum effort needed to reach the targeted outcome. Do not hesitate to say clearly what the outcome you are after is, mainly if you work with other People. There will undoubtedly be misalignments between you guys on the outcome you are after. Thus, there is a misalignment in the perception of the number of resources required to reach what is true.
Factor in that the perception of what is true can be subjective and for a statement to be accepted as true, women/men will need more or less evidence (facts). The legal system in Japan may require more evidence than the one in Peru. Just be aware of this.
Start from a hypothesis. Write down the hypothesis.
“The hypothesis is that […].”
Examples: The hypothesis is that the 2020 US presidential elections were frauded.”
Assume this hypothesis is correct, then ask what should happen.
If this hypothesis is related to an event (a point in time), what would happen before and after this event?
See this as a game. Your sense of observation and your imagination are at play.
Example for you to understand. Imagine we make the hypothesis that the 2020 US presidential elections were fraudulent. This event is related to a point in time (the 2020 US presidential election final election result, as shown in the below graph). What should happen prior to this event if this hypothesis is correct? We may also look at what should happen after this event if the hypothesis is correct although our intuition may tell us that there is more to look for before the election result than after.
If the 2020 US presidential elections were fraudulent, what should have happened before this event?
There would be a plan in place with actions related to different domains such as financing, logistics, and communication. There would be actions purely related to the election process. You can identify the potential touch points once you have mapped the US presidential election process. Can you find traces of facts related to these touchpoints? For instance, voting postal boxes are a touchpoint of the election process. The voting recording machines are another touchpoint. Can you access traces of these touchpoints? Yes, video surveillance cameras, for instance, are used for voting postal boxes. Maybe computer logs for voting recording machines.
If the 2020 US presidential elections were fraudulent, what should have happened after this event?
It’s counterintuitive to ask this question. Intuitively, most People would look at what happened before the result because your intuition would tell you that the fraud occurred before it. However, you want to find traces of facts supporting your hypothesis here. What do you think would happen if there were women/men involved in such a fraud? Well, likely there would be payments for the help provided to fraud. There is no free lunch. There would also be blackmailing with women/men threatening to release traces of facts if they do not get more money. There would likely be traces of the fraud through text messages, some People being too happy about the scam and letting critical information slip away. Here are just a few assumptions.
Who should answer the “what should happen” question?
Excellent question. Naturally, as I did above, you will use your viewpoint. “Me” thinking about what should happen. The issue is that it is one viewpoint only and it is most often a narrow viewpoint. Someone else would very likely observe something else. Factoring this in, who would have an interesting view of what would happen? If you are not able to define “who”, could you determine what type of women/men, what type of profession, and what type of skills would be likely to have an interesting view on what would happen? Don’t hesitate to go for counterintuitive actions and ask the opinion of women/men whom you would typically not think of for such a task.
Can you observe, based on traces of facts, what you predicted?
Once you have listed what you think should have happened for this hypothesis to be correct, you must check if these facts happened. You will have to search for traces of these facts. If you can find traces of these facts, then it is possible that your hypothesis can be supported and thus is potentially correct.
Fundamental questions on what is true
Why is there a need to research what is true?
How many data pieces are required to acknowledge that a hypothesis is correct?
How do we address the elephant in the room?
This is a common issue to deal with but it can be a tough and tricky one.
Is a global population reduction plan in motion?
Zoom in
In the microscopic world, what is true can often be found. Microscopes can be helpful.
Where does their money come from?
Identifying where politicians’ money comes from is helpful to understand what is true. If you have done some investigation or have a great source of information, please let us know.