Metaphors II

I was doing pretty well with my levels of confusion until I got to chapter 21, and then we moved from conventional to unconventional. The unconventional metaphors give new understanding to our experience. And I kind of like that, I like having the ability to grow and develop meanings for past events and experiences. On page 140 a list is given on things that can be loved or that are loved and there is a great deal of variability in what is loved. I am thinking back to my last blog post, which had something about perception of value and how it is related to the person. And I feel the same logic can be applied to love; ones cultural norms as well as personal values determine what they love. Thus presenting different items or ideas depending on whom you ask.

Of course the concept of truth is addressed. Concern is expressed when looking at truth and what is true because it is subjective. I have come to the conclusion that there is no truth. And that truth lies within the person because it is their perception of what is true. Last semester I took History and Theory of Rhetoric, and we got into Truth, like capital T truth.  The idea that nothing is actually true and it is all based on personal perception blew my mind; that was one of the days that I was mind-fucked.

“Metaphors cannot directly state truths, and, if they can state truths at all, it is only indirectly, via some non-metaphorical “literal” paraphrase.” (159) So from now on I’m not going to believe any metaphors because they are all false, right? Possibly, but on the other hand, metaphors are fairly useful when communicating. For me, I think it depends on the metaphor that is used. But that advise can be applied to pretty much anything, judgment and acceptance, and thus ones perception of truth depends on the situation as a whole.

“The objectivist program is unable to give a satisfactory account of human understanding and of any issues requiring such an account.” (222) I completely agree. It is difficult for a human to be objective, which in turn makes the objectivist program irrelevant for assessing anything human.  Objective isn’t how we as humans were programed to work. We can try out best and we often due; however being objective is incredibly difficult to almost impossible.

I remember hearing once that a world famous orchestra has people audition behind a black curtain. The judges sit in the audience, never knowing who the player is but only listening/ evaluating them on their musical ability. Even when the musician is finished playing the judges do not find out anything about them. This is one of the most objective practices I have heard of.