Jump to content
Doug G.

"Submitted for your approval." Waxing philosophic.

Recommended Posts

A bit of fiction:

I once knew a man who used silence as a weapon. He would make powerful assertions which had little or no basis in fact and he made them in a way that, in his mind at least, did not give away his actual lack of experience or knowledge. When someone asked a question about his worldly understandings, or challenged his beliefs with reason and experience, he would not respond. He would simply remain silent, neither moved nor moving, until a new opportunity came along for him to express his brash, unreasoned assertions. This method served him well though It did not gain him many friends, nor did it advance his understanding of the world. Those things were not of import to him, he was satisfied with feeling that his opinions were important -- after all he had expressed them forcefully and with an air of certainty.

 

Now I ask you dear readers, what is the line between fiction and truth? Can a work of fiction contain profound truth? Are fiction and truth opposites, or do they affirm one another? How do we know what is truth, what is fiction, and what is false? Is it not true that some of the greatest and most damaging lies in history have been fiction and some of the greatest and most uplifting, insightful and powerful truths have also been fiction?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's two sides to that fictional coin.

 

Your fictional man is unyielding in his opinions, which you hold to be a bad thing, and he won't be changed by a good thing - the arguments of other people's reason and experience.

 

Yet, the man who does the opposite, and embraces everyone else's reason and experience ends up like the unfortunate fellow in Aesop's fable, The Man, The Boy and The Donkey.

 

One could argue that such a man is worse off, because he stands for nothing at all.

 

Having strong and unyielding views is held to be a bad thing by modern day society,  but one can easily defend such a position.

 

George Bernard Shaw once famously said:

 

The reasonable man seeks to adapt himself to fit into the world around him.

The unreasonable man seeks to adapt the world around him to fit in with himself.

Therefore, all hope of progress lies with the unreasonable man.

(My paraphrase)

 

True objectivity in a human being is rare, and extremely difficult to obtain.

 

It can only be obtained when we constantly and rigorously judge ourselves, rather than judging others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

George Bernard Shaw once famously said:

 

The reasonable man seeks to adapt himself to fit into the world around him.

The unreasonable man seeks to adapt the world around him to fit in with himself.

Therefore, all hope of progress lies with the unreasonable man.

 

Good stuff. 

 

Rahm Emanuel - "Never Let A Good Crises Go To Waste."  

Obama 8-12-2016: Climate Change ‘Could Mean No More Glaciers In Glacier National Park,’ Threaten the Statue of Liberty http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/08/20/obama-climate-change-could-mean-no-more-glaciers-in-glacier-national-park-threaten-the-statue-of-liberty/

 

Why do warmers constantly engage is alarmism (couch the discussion in crises terms) and suggest those that disagree with them be punished?

 

http://www.ecowatch.com/al-gore-at-sxsw-we-need-to-punish-climate-change-deniers-and-put-a-pri-1882022405.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you missed the point. The questions were about the nature of truth and fiction, not about the fictional character.

I made no judgements about my character, simply presented him in simple form. Fiction, by its nature elicits judgement from the reader.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Doug,

Didn't mean to derail it.

Not derailed. You just took it in a different direction and that's okay. Communication is meant to flow in two directions and to elicit better self understanding and greater knowledge generated by open minds and respectful exchange.

(I may continue the saga of the unmoved man.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this about a person who posts on this site?

Of course not. Admin doesn't allow such things. It is about truth and fiction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Now I ask you dear readers, what is the line between fiction and truth? Can a work of fiction contain profound truth? Are fiction and truth opposites, or do they affirm one another? How do we know what is truth, what is fiction, and what is false? Is it not true that some of the greatest and most damaging lies in history have been fiction and some of the greatest and most uplifting, insightful and powerful truths have also been fiction?"

 

Often ,"truth" or "fiction" are in the eyes of the beholder. Common "Human Nature". Know a person that thinks a "Zombie Apocalypse" is in our future. Science is the pursuit of truth, with few absolutes, (duplicable predictions). Fiction can be invented by anyone.

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The International Flat Earth Research Society (IFERS) was founded by Englishman Samuel Shenton in 1956. 

 

When satellite images showed Earth as a sphere, Shenton remarked: "It's easy to see how a photograph like that could fool the untrained eye"

 

The Flat Earth Society's most recent world model is that humanity lives on a disc, with the North Pole at its center and a 150-foot (45 m) high wall of ice, Antarctica, at the outer edge. The resulting map resembles the symbol of the United Nations, which Johnson used as evidence for his position. In this model, the Sun and Moon are each 32 miles (52 km) in diameter.

 

The Flat Earthers insist their model is correct despite no scientific basis to support their conclusions.  They insist that man's effort to leave the planet and travel in space are ill-conceived and will lead to doom.  They say those that disagree with them are brainwashed and possibly dangerous.  Any of this sound familiar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the end it won't matter what we think, the universe goes on. But we can try to move in a direction that values life, and try to make our existence a bit more than statistics and means to an end. People need to come to an understanding about ourselves, and the impacts we have on our relationships and places we live, and to do that we have to set aside our preconceptions. We have an extremely limited perception, but our combined efforts expand it. We're going to get some things right, and other things wrong, and we hope that we have lots of time to study and learn which is which. That's not always the case, but that shouldn't deter us from our persuits!

 

I just hope time doesn't run out before we find those solutions!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Now I ask you dear readers, what is the line between fiction and truth? Can a work of fiction contain profound truth? Are fiction and truth opposites, or do they affirm one another? How do we know what is truth, what is fiction, and what is false? Is it not true that some of the greatest and most damaging lies in history have been fiction and some of the greatest and most uplifting, insightful and powerful truths have also been fiction?"

 

Often ,"truth" or "fiction" are in the eyes of the beholder. Common "Human Nature". Know a person that thinks a "Zombie Apocalypse" is in our future. Science is the pursuit of truth, with few absolutes, (duplicable predictions). Fiction can be invented by anyone.

 

Cheers

I am looking at fiction as story. Good stories (all story is fiction, even history, documentary, etc.) relate truth. They tell us something about ourselves and something about others and something about relationship. I could tell you the story of my father growing up in an orphanage that would contain facts, but the connection would be at a deeper level as you came to know a tough kid in a bad situation. That conveys a relational truth that is defined by your perception of the story, but that is the only truth we really know. Facts are only relevant when they somehow connect with our own lives. Then they become truth for us.

Our job is to understand ourselves in the midst of that truth and be aware of when those truths are not a part of normative experience. Our truths must take into account community and sometimes world.

A picture of a mountain is not a mountain. A story of a parent's love for a child is not that love. Both are representative, but we can perceive truth in both, possibly profoundly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our job is to understand ourselves in the midst of that truth and be aware of when those truths are not a part of normative experience. Our truths must take into account community and sometimes world.

A picture of a mountain is not a mountain. A story of a parent's love for a child is not that love. Both are representative, but we can perceive truth in both, possibly profoundly.

I was recommended this book by my ex-brother-in-law:

 

http://www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/tonyawareness.pdf

 

I've enjoyed it many times, and Doug's post above reflects on thoughts contained therein.

 

An easy read when you gave the time, and well worthwhile.

 

Oh, and as a Twilight Zone fan, I got the reference in the thread title immediately!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am looking at fiction as story. Good stories (all story is fiction, even history, documentary, etc.) relate truth. They tell us something about ourselves and something about others and something about relationship. I could tell you the story of my father growing up in an orphanage that would contain facts, but the connection would be at a deeper level as you came to know a tough kid in a bad situation. That conveys a relational truth that is defined by your perception of the story, but that is the only truth we really know. Facts are only relevant when they somehow connect with our own lives. Then they become truth for us.

Our job is to understand ourselves in the midst of that truth and be aware of when those truths are not a part of normative experience. Our truths must take into account community and sometimes world.

A picture of a mountain is not a mountain. A story of a parent's love for a child is not that love. Both are representative, but we can perceive truth in both, possibly profoundly.

 

Agree, however , there is a point of view in these things .

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Farm

 

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×