Dayak: Post-Truth and the 7 Major Issues Facing the Dayak Ethnic Group Today
Today, the Dayak, inhabitants and heirs of the world’s third-largest island, are facing post-truth. Photo credit: Masri Sareb Putra.
Read Longhouses of the Dayak People: An Intriguing and Meaningful Tourist Attraction
Today, the Dayak ethnic group, with a population of around 9 million globally, is facing at least seven major post-truth issues.
But what exactly is post-truth? What are these issues?
The Origins of Post-Truth
The academic development of the term "post-truth" is linked to theories and research explaining the historical causes and impacts of this phenomenon.The term "post-truth" had been used in phrases like "post-truth politics" academically and publicly before 2016.
Later, Oxford Dictionaries defined it as "relating to circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief."
Read This Infographic on the Distribution of the Dayak People is Misleading
In 2016, the term "post-truth" was named "Word of the Year" by Oxford Dictionaries, following its rise in popularity during the U.S. presidential election and the Brexit referendum in the UK.Oxford Dictionaries also noted that "post-truth" is frequently used as an adjective to describe a specific type of politics.
Some scholars argue that "post-truth" shares similarities with past moral, epistemic, and political debates about relativism, postmodernity, and dishonesty in politics.
Others contend that "post-truth" is specifically tied to 21st-century communication technologies and current cultural practices.
Historical Context in Philosophy
Post-truth is a historical issue relating to truth in everyday life, particularly in politics. However, truth has long been a central concern in philosophy.Truth is a highly complex concept in the history of philosophy, and much research and public debate on "post-truth" assume a particular theory of truth, known by philosophers as the correspondence theory of truth.
The most famous theory of truth, though criticized by some, is the correspondence theory, where words correspond to reality that is jointly available to be tested and verified.
Another theory of truth is coherence theory, where truth isn't just about a single statement but a series of interconnected statements about the world.
Some scholars note that the focus on philosophical debates about truth has little to do with the concept of "post-truth" as it appears in popular politics (post-truth politics), rather than in philosophy. As philosopher Julian Baggini explains:
The value of competing theories lies in their consideration of the broader context. When people debate whether there are weapons of mass destruction in Saddam Hussein's Iraq, whether global warming is real and anthropogenic, or whether austerity is necessary, their disagreements are not the result of competing theories about truth.
No witness needs to ask a judge what theory they have in mind when asked to swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Why has the meaning of truth become so problematic in the world outside academic philosophy?
One reason is the deep disagreement and uncertainty about what is considered a reliable source of truth. For most of human history, there was a stable combination of trust in texts and religious leaders, knowledgeable experts, and popular wisdom called common sense.
Now, it seems that there is almost no universal authority. This forces us to choose our own experts or simply trust our own instincts.
Read Jejak Dayak Purba: Peradaban Pleistosen Di Borneo
Experts who view "post-truth" as something historically specific, as a contemporary sociological phenomenon, argue that the "post-truth" theory is only loosely connected to traditional philosophical debates about the nature of truth.
In other words, "post-truth" as a contemporary phenomenon is not about the questions "What is truth?" or "Is X true?" but rather "Why do we disagree on what is true?"
A growing body of research increasingly supports the idea that the collapse of institutional authority in providing truth (governments, news media, especially) brought about by new media and communication technologies, new media editing technologies (visual, audiovisual), and a saturated promotional culture has led to confusion and manipulation regarding truth, even a "market" for truth.
Friedrich Nietzsche
Not all commentators, however, see "post-truth" as a historically specific phenomenon discussed through correspondence, coherence, or pragmatic theories of truth. Some thinkers discuss it within the philosophical tradition that questions what truth is. Friedrich Nietzsche, a 19th-century German philosopher, is sometimes categorized among those commentators on "post-truth."
Friedrich Nietzsche is sometimes considered a precursor to "post-truth" theory. He argued that humans create concepts through which they define what is good and just, thus replacing the concept of truth with that of value, rooting reality in human will and power.
In his 1873 essay "Truth and Lying in an Extra-Moral Sense," Nietzsche stated that humans create truths about the world through the use of metaphors, myths, and poetry. He wrote:
"If someone hides an object behind a bush, then searches for it and finds it there, the search and discovery are not particularly good: but this is what happens in the search and discovery of 'truth' in the rational domain. If I define mammals and then, after examining a camel, declare, 'Look, a kind of mammal,' a truth is revealed, but it has limited value. I mean, it is highly anthropomorphic and contains no point that would be 'true in itself' or universally valid, independent of humans. The investigator of such truth is essentially seeking to transform the world into something like humans; they struggle to understand the world as something resembling humanity, and at most get a feeling of assimilation."
According to Nietzsche, all insights and ideas arise from a particular perspective. This means that there are many perspectives through which truth or value judgments can be made. This does not mean that there is no "right" way to view the world, but it doesn’t always imply that all perspectives are equally valid.
Read Dayak Bukan Berasal dari Yunnan tapi dari Gua Niah: Ini Bukti Ilmiah Uji-karbon 40.000 Tahun Silam
Nietzsche's perspectivism denies that metaphysical objectivism is possible and asserts that no objective facts transcend cultural formation or subjective designation. This means that no objective facts exist, and understanding or knowledge of something is not possible.
Against positivism, which stops at phenomena "there are only facts," Nietzsche would say, "No, in fact, there are no facts, only interpretations." That means we cannot determine any facts "in themselves."
Therefore, truth (and especially belief in it) is a mistake, but it is a mistake necessary for life: "Truth is a kind of error without which a certain form of life could not exist."
Max Weber
Max Weber, a German sociologist and social theorist, made significant contributions to understanding the relationship between facts and values in social science. He argued that scientific facts are not detached from the social and cultural context in which they arise.
In Weber’s view, scientific facts are not neutral; rather, they are influenced by power, ideology, and prevailing values in society.
Weber emphasized that scientific knowledge is often shaped by specific interests. For instance, researchers and scientists operate within the value frameworks of society, which can influence what is considered important to study, how data is collected, and how research results are interpreted. In this context, Weber highlighted the importance of understanding the position and perspective of the researcher in the scientific process.
One key concept introduced by Weber is "verstehen," or understanding. He argued that to understand human behavior and social phenomena, researchers must consider the meanings individuals attach to their actions. This shows that the subjective aspects of human experience cannot be ignored in scientific study.
Weber distinguished between "facts" and "values," but did not treat them as absolutely separate. He acknowledged that researchers' personal values could influence their research, even as he sought to emphasize the importance of objectivity in scientific analysis.
Thus, Weber’s thought broadens our understanding of how scientific knowledge is constructed and underscores the need for critique of claims to objectivity that are often taken for granted in the social sciences.
Through this approach, Weber invites us to be more critical and reflective in understanding the facts around us.
Bruno Latour
French philosopher Bruno Latour has been criticized for contributing to the intellectual foundations of "post-truth." In 2018, The New York Times published a profile of Bruno Latour and "post-truth" politics. According to the article:
In a series of controversial books in the 1970s and 1980s, [Latour] argued that scientific facts should be seen as products of scientific inquiry.
Facts, according to Latour's actor-network theory, are "networked"; they survive or fall not based on their inherent truth but based on the power of the institutions and practices that produce and make them comprehensible.
However, the article claims it would be a misinterpretation to say that Latour doesn't believe in reality or that truth is relative.
If critics had been in the circus back then, Latour's critics might have felt something odd about the scene — long-time opponents of science worshiping at the altar of science. But what they would have missed — what they always missed — is that Latour never tried to deny the existence of gravity. He did something far more unusual: trying to re-describe the conditions under which this knowledge is known.
Equip the younger Dayak Generation with a balanced menu of intellectual nutrition and good character!
Knowledge is indeed necessary, but good character is number one.
The refutation (or rebuttal) that can be debated against Latour as a "denier of facts" comes from his article in La Recherche (1998), a French monthly magazine.
Read 7 Issues Facing the Dayak Community Today
Here, Latour discusses the 1976 discovery by French scientists working on the mummy of Pharaoh Ramses II, that his death was caused by tuberculosis. In the 1990s, Jean Bricmont and Alan Sokal wrote about Latour:
"How could he have died from a bacterium discovered by Robert Koch in 1882?"
Latour argued that it would be an anachronism to claim that Ramses II was killed by machine-gun fire or died from stress provoked by a stock market crash.
But then, Latour also asks why death from tuberculosis is not considered an anachronism. His answer: "Before Koch, that bacterium did not have real existence." He rejects the commonsense concept that Koch discovered a bacterium that already existed as "only appearing reasonable."
In this case, Latour (and Michel Foucault as well) highlights the institutional and practical contingency of generating knowledge (which in science always changes at different rates).
Hannah Arendt
Hannah Arendt is considered a source for an important concept in "post-truth" theory because she attempted to formulate something that altered history, not just to think about the nature of truth itself.
In her essay Lying in Politics (1972), Arendt described what she called "defactualization," or the inability to distinguish fact from fiction — a concept that closely resembles what we now understand as "post-truth."
Post-Truth and the Issues Facing the Dayak Today
Understanding the concept of "post-truth" holds significant correlation and relevance in the context of the issues and topics related to the Dayak people today.
Several key aspects can be identified in the relationship between "post-truth" and the major issues involving the life, civilization, and honor of the Dayak people, which include challenges related to land rights, natural resources, and cultural identity.
Understanding this "post-truth" phenomenon is highly relevant, as it can help identify how false narratives or distorted information can influence the position and rights of the Dayak people. Below are some important aspects that can be understood more deeply:
1. Debate Over Land Rights and Natural Resources
A major issue facing the Dayak people is their claim to indigenous land and natural resources, which are often targeted for exploitation by outside parties. In this context, the concept of "post-truth" can be used to examine how fake news, biased narratives, or propaganda can manipulate public opinion about the Dayak’s land rights.
Objective facts, such as their rights to indigenous land, are often overlooked or replaced by emotional narratives that support the interests of those benefiting from it.
2. Conflict Between Forestry and Conservation
The Dayak have traditional practices of utilizing forest resources, but these often conflict with modern conservation efforts. In this debate, understanding "post-truth" can help analyze how various parties may use inaccurate information or ignore scientific facts to support their positions. This can create confusion in the public about the sustainability of conservation or Dayak practices.
3. Negative Stereotyping
Certain parties may attempt to damage the image of the Dayak people by building negative stereotypes or propaganda. In the context of "post-truth", false or distorted information is used to tarnish the reputation or positive image of the Dayak, which impacts their struggle to maintain their identity and rights. This requires the Dayak community to be more critical of the narratives being built around them.
4. Cultural Preservation
The Dayak people have a rich cultural heritage and traditions. In the era of "post-truth", false or distorted narratives may be used to undermine or belittle their cultural legacy. By understanding "post-truth", we can see how some parties attempt to change or erase the values embedded in their culture, affecting the Dayak’s ability to preserve their traditions.
5. Political Participation
The Dayak must be involved in the political process in a smart and critical way. Understanding how fake news or misinformation can influence their political views is essential to ensure that their rights and interests are protected. They must be able to differentiate between valid information and misinformation in order to effectively participate in politics and society.
6. The Perception of the Dayak’s Origins
Related to the claim that "the Dayak came from Yunnan," which may reflect a post-truth construction, there is an attempt to question or change the historical identity of the Dayak people. Such claims must be tested and verified through strong scientific evidence. If no evidence supports the claim, it can be considered part of a misleading narrative.
7. Accusations Regarding Shifting Cultivation Practices
The shifting cultivation practices historically carried out by the Dayak and other tribes in Asia, including Borneo, are sometimes perceived as "environmentally damaging." This may be part of a post-truth narrative attempting to portray their traditional wisdom in a negative light. It’s crucial to understand how these practices are sustainable and their actual environmental impact to respond to such claims.
Dayak's Challenge and Response
The Dayak people have a significant responsibility in maintaining their rights and addressing contemporary challenges wisely. In the face of post-truth issues and misinformation, they must be able to differentiate between legitimate facts and false information. With the rise of technology and social media, the Dayak can use these platforms to share their message, combat misinformation, and advocate for their rights.
Read The Motif of the Tattoos of Apai Janggut and Panglima Jilah: The Legacy of Legends
Education and critical awareness among the younger Dayak generation are vital in responding to these issues. As emphasized in the book Tantang Djawab Suku Dayak by Fridolin Ukur, the Dayak must adopt a critical approach to understanding and addressing contemporary issues. This way, they can preserve their cultural identity and pass down their heritage to future generations.
The Dayak must remain masters of their own land, safeguarding their rights and fighting for a better future while continuing to approach the challenges of the times with wisdom and decisiveness.
-- Masri Sareb Putra