| re: .2
Informed decisions. Written words are like any other ideas that must stand
the test of coherence, stability, rationaility, logic, to name just a few.
I think that our predisposition to believe the printed word above other
media belies our willingness to let others think for us. When people
quote books here, it brings a ring of authority (s/he was published and
therefore must know what their subject is).
Words are simply ideas that people espouse. Some of them are true, some of
them are not, some are dribble (neither true nor false). When you read
something, something in you will say, "I believe the ideas this person has
penned," or "I do not believe the ideas this person has penned."
The question we *should* ask is "why do I [not] believe the ideas this person
has penned." The problem with this question is that it might be too much
work to go through, so we follow "instinct" or read about someone who
confirms an idea.
Note that Goebbels said something like "if you repeat a lie long enough and
strenuously enough, it begins to have the ring of truth." And many Germans
in World War II didn't know (Crystal Night opened many eyes, too late
- referencing the World at War on PBS) how deep they had gotten with
allowing the Nazis to control German society.
So we rely on informed decisions and making value judgments on hte material
we read.
There is a saying that says "You are what you eat." If ideas are food for
the mind, then we need to know the kind of food we feed our minds, as much
as the nutrition concerns about our bodies.
Mark Metcalfe
|
| < Brains are good for separating fact from fiction.
<
< Books which make absurd claims are easy to discredit, given all
< the necessary truths.
<
<-mike z
Ah, but that's the problem! Our world is so complicated that getting
the "necessary" truths is no small feat. Adding that much of what we
read has been filtered through the gatekeepers (which means those in
power) we must be doubly sure to doubt.
It brings to mind my anthropology instructor's words. "Myth is more
powerful than truth, and it gets remembered longer". Whether that is
good or bad depends on what we want to accomplish.
For generations young men were taught that war and dying in battle for
"the cause" were noble concepts. That glory was their reward and virtue
would triumph. If your goal is training young men to run to their
deaths without questioning why that is a handy myth. If you want
statesmen who understand the true cost in human suffering that a war
brings about the myth is dangerous. The books we are seeing now about
the more recent wars tell a very different story than those sold during
the wars. The same goes for movies. Ever seen any of the old WW II
propaganda pictures? liesl
|