This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - MetaCognition
Pages: 1 2
I can tell you like George Carlin.
Well, I spent the last year traveling the country and training under some really talented chefs. I had been reading some econ and ethics books along with some political ones, until my glasses were destroyed while I was spending some time in the Rockies. Got some new skis and unfortunately had to cancel my March work trip to Colorado so never really got to break them in. And I've been embroiled in a drawn out battle over some of my possessions with my mother, including my recipe book and some key work things, since she got arrested for assaulting me at the beginning of April.I remember you.
So, there are a couple of interesting questions raised by the rioting. First and foremost is: what is the nature of a riot like this? Is it a disorganised political movement, a reflexive act of rejection of an unjust system or mere opportunistic criminality? Perhaps some combination? When is it justifiable to riot? Further, is it justifiable for individuals of one community to participate in a riot whose genesis lies in injustice done to another community? (The white people currently rioting, for instance.) The final big question I see this as raising is whether the individual motivations of rioters are morally valent? Is a riot less legitimate if it is comprised with a proportionally larger set of opportunistic looters and antisocial types?
I'd be interested to hear some thoughts on these questions. For what it's worth, here are my takes, very briefly: riots (at least those like this) are essentially an expressive act of rejection against an unjust social order. There is no no aim--no goal--in the act of rioting, precisely because the rioting arises from the frustration of ordinary goal-directed activities. Accordingly, it is okay for people of one community to participate in a riot which has its genesis in the injustices against another community, so long as their participation represents a 'fitting attitude' to the injustice. Finally, the individual motivations of rioters are not particularly important for the moral assessment of riots as such: in being an expressive act of rejection, riots necessarily consist in wilful violation of public order. Looting, and the desire to loot, therefore, are not morally corrupting elements within given riots.
« on: May 29, 2020, 02:25:49 AM »
You four years ago was depressing enough. Why do you have to do us dirty like this?
It’s like attorneys in a court case
« on: May 27, 2020, 05:35:29 PM »
« on: May 27, 2020, 05:34:52 PM »
I resent British higher education, but not for the academics and the work they do. At least in my department, relations within and with the faculty are incredibly good.
There are, undoubtedly, some things which institutionalised academia is good at doing. But, to be honest, I really do think if you know how to engage with the field you’re in (in my case reading primary and secondary literature) then you can make a decent enough job of it yourself, if the goal is personal fulfilment rather than accreditation. Although this will depend on your learning style, I’m not somebody who gets all that much from lectures and note-taking anyway.
Also, it will have the effect of meaning you will probably need to get most of your resources illegally unless you want to go bankrupt. But, let’s be honest, who cares about that?
My point is that these are not present in the text itself. Narrative is textual; we may engage hermeneutically in a narrative-like way with given pieces of text, but I don't think this makes the text itself narrative.If you're asking me what I think makes a narrative? I'm not entirely sure. I'd probably say something like the syntagmatic coherence of a representation of a set of events, where the representation (the narrative) is constituted by a structure of diachronic (fictive) emplotment which renders heterogenous agents, events and objects intelligible in the context of the whole.and the six-word example doesn't fit this framework?
Perhaps I am just clutching, though; if it properly fits my criteria, then yes, it's a narrative.
]a story with this "self-contained teleological orientation" that you described—an element that is innate to the story, and is not merely inferred—such that its removal would cede its narrative status by reducing it to a mere sequence of eventsI'm not convinced that a telos is the relevant criterion for determining narrative status. At the very least, to think narratives are monadically teleological, in that just adding a telos to a mere sequence produces a narrative, is reductive. Many narratives are teleological, in that they are prospective with some core normative orientation ('redemption'), and this is particularly relevant in identity accounts ('the good life').
But I don't think the rescission of a telos makes something not a narrative; I don't think Dostoevsky's polyphonic novels are teleological, nor Capote's In Cold Blood, but I would consider them both narrative works.
If you're asking me what I think makes a narrative? I'm not entirely sure. I'd probably say something like the syntagmatic coherence of a representation of a set of events, where the representation (the narrative) is constituted by a structure of diachronic (fictive) emplotment which renders heterogenous agents, events and objects intelligible in the context of the whole.
An example of what, exactly?This doesn't seem particularly pertinent to me. A narrative can have a self-contained teleological orientation without any affirmation of some metaphysical telos. All this would entail is that there is some mythopoeic element to narrativity (depending on how expansively you want to define myth)--if we think a telos is necessary--and that's a bullet I'd probably be willing to bite.okay, so before i respond properly, do you have a specific example in mind?
is it the lack of telos? the problem with this is that, if you were to be a nihilist, then all of teleology is a myth anyway; so you could argue that there's no point to any story beyond that which you can infer for yourselfThis doesn't seem particularly pertinent to me. A narrative can have a self-contained teleological orientation without any affirmation of some metaphysical telos. All this would entail is that there is some mythopoeic element to narrativity (depending on how expansively you want to define myth)--if we think a telos is necessary--and that's a bullet I'd probably be willing to bite. Some literary theorists (viz. Hayden White) and philosophers (Ricoeur) are more than happy to concede that in representation the use of narratives adds something that isn't contained in a mere sequential account of events, or a chronicle, and I think we can think about this broadly as a process of fictionalisation. And, I mean, some people bite like Dennett bite this bullet completely when it comes to personal identity, affirming both the narrative account and its fictional status.
So I don't really see the bite of this concern when it comes to narrative structure. And, sure, we're perspectivally trapped when it comes to matters of interpretation; there are still better and worse ways of reading Shakespeare that arise from the form and content of the text. You could even say that about your one-sentence (hind-)narrative, that there is some normative force behind the fact that the form of the sentence is clearly trying to get you to engage imaginatively, such that engaging with it imaginatively constitutes a more 'faithful' interpretation of the 'narrative'--at least at the level of the reader's comportment.
the other items you proposed, again, just kinda seem like personal preferences to me—you would naturally prefer that a story possess these qualities, as i would, because it makes them more entertaining, cohesive, or immediately meaningful, but given the subjective nature of these—what resonates with you may not resonate with me—i'm not so quick to co-opt those suggestionsI think they're all deeply problematic. Just less problematic than the equivalence of narratives with mere sequences or singular events. And these problems take on an ethical actuality if we think they have relevance for matters of personal identity, as I do.
EDIT: There is something interesting about your 'narrative' however, namely the diachronicity implied by the word "never". It intimates the reader into thinking both backwards and forwards, such that a sequence of events can be envisioned that have meaning in relation to one another. I wouldn't call it a narrative, however, but would certainly concede that it leads one to easily infer a narrative. But the interesting thing about this is that it points to a possible condition of narrative structure beyond mere sequence: a diachronically-extended set of events, the meanings of which are understood in relation to the whole, and vice versa.
i do think you could essentially reduce a narrative down to "any sequence of events" told with the purpose of relaying some kind of ontological experience—or hell, even just one event, like in that famous six-word story:
I don't think this constitutes a reduction of the narrative down to an event. Narratologically the sentence doesn't qualify; the content of whatever the reader infers may constitute a narrative, but this is a different object to the sentence.
What’s the skinny on your writing, at the moment/over the last four years?as far as my novel goes, the pen has officially made contact with the paper, and as you would imagine, the quarantine has given me ample excuse to work on it more than i ever have—which makes me feel like a gross opportunist, but whatever
I relate to that final point but wouldn’t say I regret it. University has without doubt killed a substantial part of my motivation to read/write things which are fictional, or even just non-academic. That being said, I’m not sure 18-year-old me would’ve invested that time much better anyway.
I’m hoping that the transition to doing a PhD and thus research-based work rather than content-loaded modules will give me the space necessary to pursue some more creative endeavours.
How has university been for you, overall?
Giving up piano is one of the greatest regrets of my life.
Although that is no doubt primarily aesthetic, in that I think it would be cool as fuck to rock up somewhere, discover there’s a piano there, and just bust something out.
Why support someone who would push you in a forced labor camp?so how do you think trump's doing, given your support of him
Ignoring the sheer unlikelihood of that, I’m British so I have distance anyway.
i mean in 2016 of courseso how do you think trump's doing, given your support of himI don't support Trump; I was hoping Sanders would win the Democratic primary.
I think that was foolishly contrarian of me and I'm struggling to not hide in the convenient refuge of claiming to have been ironic.
Dude, what happened to you?
Yes, I do.
Has he not slept for five nights?
I didn't sleep for six nights during benzo withdrawal and I was psychotic by the end of it. He should probably go to a hospital.
Pages: 1 2