Implications of Truth

I was just thinking about our topic and I realized that what we have all come to understand really impacts our way of life more than we realize.
For example what if we took this idea and applied it in court scenario. This implication would be disastrous. Because everything and nothing is true, which would mean that whatever was brought forward as evidence could be denied by the accused and no one could prove that in their world it was or was not true.
This also has an effect on how we view people that we might consider "insane." What if what they are seeing is what is actually going on? What if we are all delusional and they are the only ones who truly see sense? Is it possible to see the truth?
As we progress farther and farther into this unit more and more question are being asked that can’t be answered because of this restraint of truth not being entirely valid. It seems backwards that now truth appears to be very restrictive while the saying says "the truth will set you free."

A Very Different World

While reading "Born and Raised in a North Korean gulag" the idea of truth never being constant (http://iyagovos.blogspot.com/2010/09/truth.html#comments  -thanks for the insight James!) really solidified in my mind. During the presentations of our "objective" truths I found the arguments that consisted of people being taught something else unrealistic because I couldn't understand how anyone could have been taught otherwise. Now having read this article these claims against the objective truths seem more concrete than they did before.

It is surprising to me at how trusting our minds are, at how we, as human beings, believe things right off the bat. What also surprises me is how in “Born and Raised in a North Korean gulag” he thought that the prison that he was in was the way of life everywhere; it is surprisingly hard to understand how someone could possibly believe that was life for everybody. I think that, for me at least, not being able to understand how someone could believe something like that is because we live in a very different world comparatively. This is seen a lot in “We” because D-503 often writes about how the old world must have been very wild and how he cannot image a world like that because he has grown up in an entirely different environment.  

I also found that Shin’s feelings toward his mother and brother were very interesting. I think that this is interesting point because this also shows that truth also effects your emotions to a large extent. Because Shin had grown up feeling hatred toward them for trying to run away the truth of his love for her was then masked be his taught hate for her because of the pain she had inadvertently caused him.

The Truth about Truth

Having listened to the presentations on objective truth be torn down within a space of sixty seconds, it is impossible to not realize that there are very few, if any real objective truths in this world. Once you really begin to think about it, everything we have ever been told (that we assume is the objective truth) is really very subjective. From the point of view of a history class we are told that this war happened in some such year and this monstrosity was committed by these people, at the same time that we are told that history is always written, which in itself implies that not only is there a bias but so of the horrible things that they did could have been removed. In 1984 this is seen specifically when the people edit and correct what is said in all of the historical documents, "fixing" history so that everything seems perfect. This editing of the truth is important to recognize in everyday life because not only are we told perfected lies, we are also told half truths, however what makes this so scary is that we are told these things and we assume that they are true AND the people that tell them to us as fact also believe that they are the absolute truth.  So at this point our problem with “truth” today is almost parallel to the problem with “truth” in 1984, the only difference is that we do not consciously go back through history and revise it, while we might write out the first facts “incorrectly.”

We also often see the manipulation of truth in debates. This is because to one fact there is almost always a counter fact, in a debate you obviously present the information that best backs your idea, but there is still that other truth, you have just filtered out the information that did not benefit you. This then moves me on to the next point in the discussion of the manipulation of the truth; we use the assumption of truth to benefit ourselves. This is seen in 1984 many times, the most important of which is near the end on the novel when O'Brien tells Winston that 2+2=5. This is an example of the manipulation of truth for one’s own benefit because O'Brien needed to convince Winston that what they told him was the truth and that everything that he had thought was the truth was false.

Reflecting on the presentations of objective truth, it is frightening when you realize that everything we have be taking point blank as truth really isn’t that solid a statement. Many of the “truths” that we found to be more objective than subjected were incredibly specific or basic and refined, however some of the “truths” that we  thought would be really easy to prove were in fact if they were looked at with a little more concentration we found them to be quite flawed.

An Enlightening Exercise

The exercise we did in class today really made me think about the amount of times that I have written with the use of large pompous words. After thinking about the text we were given about George Orwell’s opinion on writing again I find that I agree with him a little more after experiencing the effect of that kind of writing.

While changing the speeches given to us into the type of writing that Orwell would have thoroughly disliked, I became aware of how many famous people that we still quote today wrote and spoke, breaking virtually every one of Orwell’s rules. This exercise also surprised me because it made me realize that I often wrote in a similar way, especially when I didn’t really feel comfortable with the information or did not know what I was talking about.

When we were completing the portion of the exercise that was to change the writing to follow the rules in Orwell’s text, I found that it was a lot harder that I thought it would be. I expect that this was because I am so use to writing with bigger words and really dancing around an idea instead of getting straight to the point.

Now that I have seen both of the effects of obeying Orwell’s rules and totally disregarding them, I believe that thought disobeying Orwell’s rules sounds more sophisticated, following them is a better way of writing. However I think that it is also the harder out of the two because of the way we have been writing in the past.

Opinions of the English Language

This text, "Politics and the English Language" is extremely opinionated and a subjective truth. From the information given at the top of the page we see that this view of English is out dated by about 60 years. We also can understand the George Orwell’s opinion of the English language is very strong. I personally agree with only a small portion of this article, I find that some of Orwell’s claims about the use of metaphors relevant to today’s writing styles. In today’s world we use metaphors often to describe thing in our lives, however I agree that some metaphors “are used without the knowledge of their meaning.

 Most of his opinions about “Pretentious diction” I find to be incorrect for the present day English. Nowadays our vocabulary has expanded to encompass most of these words as normal vocabulary and the words we use from different languages have either become customary or have been translated into English and used. In comparison some of the language that Orwell uses to describe these “pretentious words” today we tend to find them used to sound intelligent or pretentious, for example Orwell uses the word “sordid” in his writing and currently that word is not used often in language.

I also disagree with Orwell’s approach to the writing of art and literary criticism. From this text it appears that Orwell’s prefers it if writing is all cut and dry, that authors don’t dance around a point or describe things “vaguely.” I find that Orwell’s examples of meaningless (words as applied to art), do hold value in description and criticism. The words “living” and “dead” (when applied to art) do hold meaning in the art world today, and are valued pieces of criticism.

"Politics and the English Language" is an example of subjective truth because not only was this an opinion at the time, but the information has changed and will continue to change.

Experiencing A Novel

The text "The Psychology of the Novel" brings up many points that also relate to the novel “1984” as wells as the effects of ones life on a story they read. In the text the author writes “it exists not as words in books but as images with feelings attached.” This statement means that to any given person the experience of reading the same books is different from the next, because of the different events they have lived through and the different ways in which we all see the world. “Every word seems to relate to and reflect upon every other word, building layers of meaning and feeling that seem to shift continuously,” this relates heavily to the novel “1984” because in that society they are forever changing what is written and this means that, even though the words do relate to one another the meanings can never be layered because how the information and texts have been edited and “fixed.”

Later in the text the author writes about how a reader instantly perceives and reacts to “the qualities of the voice,” this is seen in “1984” as well because of the reactions to the Two Minutes Hate. The people living in  1984 are all programmed to react to a certain voice and image in a specific way. Even though in 1984 this is a bad thing in present day it is not perceived as so horrible because we are reacting from past experiences and knowledge.  A little farther into the text the author also talks about how a persons experiences and connection to the novel effects the way that they read it. This is also seen in “1984” because Winston gets “the book” and because of his interaction with the Party, O’Brien, the Brotherhood, and Julia he reads “the book” with complete trust.

The author of  "The Psychology of the Novel" proceeds to talk about the willingness of suspended disbelief and it’s effect on the experience of reading a novel. Personally, I believe that being able to lift your self out of reality and read a story without the prejudices we have of/in the real world really impact your ability to understand what the story is about. This is also written in "The Psychology of the Novel."  However the way that the idea is presented also hold a lot of power of experience. As said in "The Psychology of the Novel" some stories are written so that you notice the little things along the way because you really already know the outcome. This is a major part of the story of “1984” because all through the novel Julia and Winston know that they are going to die and the essentially they are already dead, but they live in the here and now to see what they can do in the present to maximize their lives.