Seeking Truth Requires Considering Other Views

If one assumes that they lack knowledge, the next step is to seek it. If we want to learn more than we know, we will have to investigate points of view that don’t belong to us already. While it is possible that new knowledge exists outside the bounds of accepted truth, scriptural examples suggest it is much more likely that further light and truth will clash with what we already think we know than support it. However, this gives us no reason to fear reading or hearing information that doesn’t agree with what we believe. After all, if we believe man is fallen and God is perfect, we ought to understand that his revelation of our misconceptions is how we become more like him.

Fear of searching was not present historically. Consider the following:

If we have the truth, it cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not the truth, it ought to be harmed. (President J. Reuben Clark)

Convince us of our errors of Doctrine, if we have any, by reason, by logical arguments, or by the Word of God and we will ever be grateful for the information and you will ever have the pleasing reflections that you have been instruments in the hands of God of redeeming your fellow beings. (Orson Pratt, “The Seer,” p. 15.)

...[t]he man who cannot listen to an argument which opposes his views either has a weak position or is a weak defender of it. No opinion that cannot stand discussion or criticism is worth holding. And it has been wisely said that the man who knows only half of any question is worse off than the man who knows nothing of it. He is not only onesided but his partisanship soon turns him into an intolerant and a fanatic. In general, it is true that nothing which cannot stand up under discussion or criticism is worth defending. (James E. Talmage Improvement Era, Jan 1920, p. 204)

If a faith will not bear to be investigated; if its preachers and professors are afraid to have it examined, their foundation must be very weak. (President George A. Smith)

I think a full, free talk is frequently of great use; we want nothing secret nor underhanded, and I for one want no association with things that cannot be talked about and will not bear investigation. (Journal of Discourses, 20:264)

I admire men and women who have developed the questioning spirit, who are unafraid of new ideas and stepping stones to progress. We should, of course, respect the opinions of others, but we should also be unafraid to dissent—if we are informed. Thoughts and expressions compete in the marketplace of thought, and in that competition truth emerges triumphant. Only error fears freedom of expression. This free exchange of ideas is not to be deplored as long as men and women remain humble and teachable. Neither fear of consequence nor any kind of coercion should ever be used to secure uniformity of thought in the church. People should express their problems and opinions and be unafraid to think without fear of ill consequences. We must preserve freedom of the mind in the church and resist all efforts to suppress it. (Hugh B. Brown, counselor in First Presidency, Speech at BYU, March 29, 1958.)

As you accept the responsibility to seek after truth with an open mind and a humble heart, you will become more tolerant of others, more open to listen, more prepared to understand... (Dieter F. Uchtdorf, https://www.lds.org/broadcasts/article/cesdevotionals/2013/01/what-is-truth)

Many have noted the strong tendency of Latter-day Saints to avoid making waves. They seem strangely touchy on controversial issues. This begets an extreme lack of candor among the Saints, which in turn is supported by a new doctrine, according to which we have a Prophet at our head who relieves us of all responsibility for seeking knowledge beyond a certain point, making decisions, or taking action on our own. (Hugh Nibley, Temples of the Ancient World, p. 610)

...while I believe all that God has revealed, I am not quite sure that I understand what he has revealed, and the fact that he has promised further revelation is to me a challenge to keep an open mind and be prepared to follow wherever my search for truth may lead....We have been blessed with much knowledge by revelation from God which, in some part, the world lacks. But there is an incomprehensibly greater part of truth which we must yet discover. Our revealed truth should leave us stricken with the knowledge of how little we really know. It should never lead to an emotional arrogance based upon a false assumption that we somehow have all the answers--that we in fact have a corner on truth....Preserve...the freedom of your mind in education and in religion, and be unafraid to express your thoughts and to insist upon your right to examine every proposition. We are not so much concerned with whether your thoughts are orthodox or heterodox as we are that you shall have thoughts. (Hugh B. Brown, BYU May 13, 1969 address, “An Eternal Quest: Freedom of the Mind.” )

Despite the historical record of church leaders advocating exactly that, we find ourselves in a paradigm that challenges us to not only avoid consideration of opposing positions, but to avoid even the idea of rational evaluation of our own position.¹

Searching for truth requires a willingness to investigate both sides of a position as objectively as possible. If you are merely arguing for your position, you cannot honestly say you are searching for truth. You do not know all things, and therefore you cannot ever be totally sure that you are right. If you aren't willing to be wrong about something, you can only go so far in your search for truth.

There ought not be any fear of losing what you already have—a rational mind will only replace a previous position with a more solid position. An open mind and a desire to know truth will only ever lead a person closer to God.

Fear of finding new truth is simply not well founded. As a camera focuses, the image becomes more clear. Although the view certainly changes, the progress is always a refinement. A focused camera picture represents only information gain, not loss. Perhaps this is why Nephi said,

I know that the words of truth are hard against all uncleanness; but the righteous fear them not, for they love the truth and are not shaken. (2 Nephi 9:40.)

Nephi himself was no stranger to uncomfortable new truth. His life was a constant barrage of paradigm shifts. These showed him that he could always confide in God, even if it meant abandoning things he previously thought were true, or blazing paths unfamiliar to his culture and heritage.

Knowledge of opposing views is absolutely necessary for two reasons. First, a rational position requires knowledge of both sides of an issue. For example, how could you honestly say that one variety of apple is the tastiest if you’ve never tried another variety? Second, you cannot effectively persuade others if you are not aware of why they believe what they do. Knowing your counterpart’s reasons for their belief is a two-fold benefit. First, construction of a persuasive argument on your part requires you to address their reasons for believing. Continuing with the apple example, how could you persuade a fan of golden delicious that granny smith is superior if you have never actually tried golden delicious? The strength of your position depends on your addressing their reasons for believing. Secondly, an intrinsic benefit of investigating your opponent’s position is the possible discovery that they are, in fact, correct. Just as you could possess evidences of your position that your counterpart had never considered, so could they. You could very well end up supporting their position should their evidence prove stronger than yours. Yet, such a situation is to be desired, not feared, for those in possession of greater truth have drawn closer to God.