Blogia

Vanity Fea

Retropost: Qué es la verdad

miércoles, 25 de mayo de 2016

Retropost #947 (25 de mayo de 2006): Qué es la verdad

...dijo Pilatos. Dos posturas poco ejemplares (por lo ejemplares, precisamente): la de Cristo, que dice "yo soy la verdad" (y tú no, se sobreentiende), y la de Pilatos, que le levanta una ceja y le pregunta "¿qué es la verdad?" (según Nietzsche, la única frase razonable del Evangelio) - y Pilatos no se autocontesta, claro. Cristo en el Evangelio es un naïf, sólo que tiene razón (allí, para el autor del libro); Pilatos es un tío culto, elegante, maquiavélico y corrupto, no cree en verdades, para él cada cual se hace su propia verdad, y no va a entrar en discusiones. Como Humpty Dumpty, se atiene a quién manda. Y manda a Cristo a que le den de palos, en lugar de entrar en disquisiciones. Por conveniencia, no porque crea que está equivocado: para Pilatos cada cual define su propia verdad. Y como a su juicio la verdad de Cristo corta menos bacalao que la verdad de Herodes... pues te jodes.

Ayer leía en el ADN una reflexión sobre la verdad, en la columna "The End" ("¿Existe la verdad?", por Ángela Becerra). La periodista nos decía que todas las grandes verdades que nos han vendido a lo largo de la Historia (las "grandes narrativas" que diría Lyotard) han resultado ser grandes mentiras impuestas por los poderes de turno... "inmensas mentiras aceptadas sin rechistar" (sic; bueno, muchos han rechistado; otra cosa es el éxito del rechiste...)

... Y su conclusión era un tanto maquiavélica o pilatesca. Que la verdad no existe, o mejor dicho, que existen tantas verdades como personas, que cada cual se haga su propia verdad y que se quede contento con ella, pues es lo que hacemos de hecho, pero sin dar la matraca a los demás:

"Nos cueste o no aceptarlo, al final la verdad que más nos sirve es la nuestra. Sin fanatizarse, tratar de imponerla, ni permitir que nos la impongan. Evidentemente será temporal y se irá con nuestras cenizas, pero a cambio ni incordiaremos ni nos dejaremos dominar por nada ni por nadie"

Me parece ilustrativa esta postura ante la verdad por lo sintomática, por lo aparentemente razonable, tolerante y democrática. Va mucho en la onda de los tiempos light (lolái, lolái, que decía Aute). Todos hoy Cristos... y Pilatos: pilotos de nuestro destino y capitanes de nuestra alma. Cada cual contento con su verdad que es mentira, como los fetos cultivados de Matrix cada cual soñando con su verdad. No parecía preocuparle a la columnista el problema de lo pequeñito de esa verdad solitaria, que sólo es verdad para uno mismo... una paja mental más que una verdad parece, como criterio.

Una verdad solitaria no es verdad. La verdad necesita ser reconocida, compartida, comunicada. Es aletheia, desvelamiento, el camino de salida de la caverna. Si la verdad es una ficción, es una ficción consensuada en una comunidad lo más amplia posible: que incluya al filósofo. La verdad no es tal si no se enfrenta y contrapone a la mentira, a la falsedad, a las ilusiones sin fundamento. Las teorías pragmáticas de la verdad tampoco se conforman con una verdad estática y solitaria: la verdad es proceso de creación de "efectos de verdad", un continuo desvelar lo oculto, percibir lo que no se veía, en diálogo con otras verdades parciales. Ahí sí que llevaba más razón Cristo, cuando decía que hay que proclamar la verdad:

"¿Se trae el candil para meterlo debajo del celemín o debajo de la cama, o para ponerlo en el candelero? Si se esconde algo, es para que se descubra; si algo se hace a ocultas, es para que salga a la luz. El que tenga oídos para oír, que oiga"

Triste verdad la que se cocina cada cual para guardársela en un celemín. Por eso me temo que por muy intolerante y prepotente que parezca eso de tratar de hacer que los demás se apunten a nuestra versión de la verdad, seguiremos todos dando la matraca.

Alucinación consensuada


Retroposts


—oOo—

Retropost: Guerra contra el crimen organizado

miércoles, 25 de mayo de 2016

Retropost #946 (25 de mayo de 2006): Guerra contra el crimen organizado



El Gobierno por fin toma medidas, e instaura un centro de inteligencia contra las bandas de mafiosos y atracadores. Esperemos que hayan aprendido algo de la experiencia de la TIA... ¡Mano dura a esas pandas de bandoleros que van amedrentando al personal y sacándole los cuartos! ¡A la cárcel con las bandas de criminales! Aunque... ejem.. ¿por qué no abrimos mejor un proceso de paz y una mesa de negociación donde estén representadas todas las bandas? ¿Por qué habría de haber aquí vencedores y vencidos? Eso sería prepotente. Igual con unos beneficios penitenciarios y un acotamiento territorial de sus actividades.... con unos cupones de contribución voluntaria por parte de los que no se sintiesen amenazados por ellos -- igual hasta se podría instaurar un sistema mixto de protección a los posibles amenazados por otras bandas. O ayudas para actividades culturales, una pensioncilla a los miembros de las bandas que declaren un alto el fuego. Igual podíamos reconducir la cosa sin necesidad de violencia y de vías policiales.... No sé, es una idea.

Impuesto revolucionario con desgravación


Retroposts


—oOo—

El lenguaje de los sitios en red

miércoles, 25 de mayo de 2016

Retropost #945 (25 de mayo de 2006): Re: El lenguaje de los sitios en red


Escribí en el blog una reseña del libro The Language of Websites (Routledge, 2005), y me ha contestado el autor, Mark Boardman, con una réplica casi tan larga como la reseña. Así que lo incluyo en su lugar correspondiente del verano pasado:

The language of Websites
A photo on Flickr




Retroposts


—oOo—

A Glorious Accident - Stephen Jay Gould: The Unanswerable








Stephen Jay Gould - Science, Fate and Religion

martes, 24 de mayo de 2016

 








Of Beauty and Consolation: Stephen Jay Gould

martes, 24 de mayo de 2016

Of Beauty and Consolation - Stephen Jay Gould



 




—oOo—

Un día por la Val Estrecha

martes, 24 de mayo de 2016

Un día por la Val Estrecha

 

Un día en la Val Estrecha 2

Retropost: Narrative Dreams - Dream Narratives

martes, 24 de mayo de 2016

Retropost #944 (24 de mayo de 2016): Narrative Dreams / Dream Narratives

En la lista de distribución Narrative-L nos dice Michael Kimmer que va a estudiar los sueños desde el punto de vista narratológico, junto con "un colega vienés", y busca sugerencias...

Hello everybody, 
A Viennese colleague and I are working on a research proposal for the empirical analysis of dream transcripts. We are interested in finding out whether dreams tend to have narrative structure or not, which is a debated issue due to the often bizarre, erratic, highly compressed, and associative way in which dreams seem to unfold.
I would be interested in learning about empirical work around this topic from you, (perhaps even a recent survey article?).
I’d also appreciate discussing different theoretical approaches to narrativity and how they can be transformed into a manageable qualitative code system for a fairly large corpus. After all, how we define the notion will very much influence the answer to our question.
Finally, I would like to raise an issue that might interest those of you conversant with cognitive linguistic theory: The fact that compression plays such an important role in dreams made me think that the conceptual integration framework by Fauconnier and Turner (2002), in which compression plays a major role, might be applicable. Turner in particular, in other publications, has also applied the framework to narrative, but specific ways of bringing it to bear on our topic still elude me.
looking forward to your comments & ideas,
Michael

Así que envío esta respuesta (mi primera intervención en la lista):

Dear Michael Kimmer (and fellow members of the list):

"some dreams are born narrative, some achieve narrativity, and some have narrativity thrust upon ’em"!

It seems to me that an analysis of dream narrativity is bound to face, sooner or later, the observer’s paradox, as well as other paradoxes. There is no way to access the content of a dream as opposed to the dream tale, other than to analyze one’s own dreams as compared to one’s (re)telling of them. But if your are both the subject and the object of your experiment, some Heisenbergian distortions may be inevitable: self-consciousness about the project may intervene as a narrativizing factor. Not to mention the problem of privacy, infinite regression, etc., once your dreams have been censored and rearranged in order to be narrated, they will still have to be censored and rearranged in order to be retold along with their previous retellings in your self-analysis. And we haven’t even mentioned the nature of that censorship: Freudian issues of repression, unconsciousness, etc. So that direction of analysis is fraught with self-evident difficulties. And yet an approach to dream narratives that does not address the issue of dream "in-itself" vs. dream narrative is bound to be limited and flawed in a number of ways. Which is not to say that there are not other potentially interesting directions for analysis, including conventional narratological analysis of dream texts (alone) or comparisons of different dream-texts while leaving aside the issue of the dream itself. As to Fauconnier and Turner, I don’t know whether they address anywhere the possible links between their conceptual integration framework and the Freudian concepts of condensation and displacement, the "dream-work", quoi, but that would seem to be a must for this line of analysis. I don’t think I can be much help there, but perhaps other people may offer useful suggestions on how (not) to approach the subject.

All the best,
JOSE ANGEL GARCIA LANDA
Universidad de Zaragoza



HERE FOLLOW SOME REJOINDERS: Hi, i’ll add some comments on Tony Jackson’s comments on my comments on dream narratives in capitals... but please don’t assume I’m shouting! this is for the sake of readability.

Tony Jackson:
>I’ve wondered about dreams as narratives too, and also wonder if they’ve been given any detailed treatment by literary narrative theory.
WELL I WOULDN’T BEGIN WITH LITERARY NARRATIVE THEORY BUT WITH FREUD ON DELIRIUM AND DREAMS IN JENSEN’S GRADIVA, OR BETTER STILL WITH HIS INTERPRETATION ON DREAMS, OR WITH ARTEMIDORUS... I’M ENCLOSING A SHORT BIBLIOGRAPHICAL LIST IN CASE SOMEONE FINDS IT HELPFUL.
With my understanding of Michael’s project, I don’t see the need to worry about Freud. Unless the project is to be an empirical study of Freud’s theories in particular, most of his ideas won’t matter because they’re not adequately based in scientific kinds of knowledge;
PSYCHOANALYSIS IS NOT A SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINE, BUT AN INTERPRETIVE, HUMANISTIC AND SEMIOTIC ONE.
and also the theoretical understanding of narrative has come a long way since Freud’s time.
STILL, IF YOU REREAD FREUD YOU MAY BE IN FOR SOME FRESH INSIGHTS ALL THE TIME. BUT BY ALL MEANS, READ ALSO LACAN, DERRIDA, AND WHAT NOT.
For some kind of qualitative coding, I imagine older more structuralist work such as Todorov s or even Propp s would provide the kind of abstracted categories that could be cross-referenced and counted. I wonder, though, if this might tend to reveal only already-established archetypal plots and characters?
BEWARE OF READY-MADE CATEGORIES AND COUNTING. BEWARE OF THE ESPRIT DE GÉOMETRIE. (I LIKE NARRATOLOGY, THOUGH. BUT READ, ALSO, FEYERABEND, AGAINST METHOD.
>I disagree with Jose s worry about getting at the subject of study. If it’s an empirical study, then why wouldn’t you just take the written or spoken report of the dream as the narrative that matters? Just as you take a written story as the story that you’ll study?
BECAUSE A DREAM NARRATIVE IS AN ACCOUNT OF A REAL EVENT, IE THE DREAM. YOU ARE PRESUPPOSING SOME KIND OF AESTHETIC-LITERARY STUDY OF DREAMS AS IF THEY WERE FICTIONS. IT IS, AS I SAID, ONE POSSIBLE AVENUE, BUT A VERY LIMITED ONE. SURELY ONE SHOULD STUDY DREAMS AS DREAMS, NOT AS FICTIONS (WHICH IS NOT TO SAY NARRATOLOGY HAS NOTHING TO SAY ABOUT THEM, QUITE THE CONTRARY).
Then I imagine you could try to bring already established narratological ideas to bear in the examination. I assume with Jose that the subject-object problem would be a basic issue, though I might say narrator-narratee.
OK, THAT IS RELEVANT. BUT DON’T STOP AT THE NARRATOR’S LEVEL. CROSS THE BORDER TO THE AUTHOR’S LEVEL. THE UNCONSCIOUS AS AUTHOR, THE CONSCIOUS AS READER. FOR INSTANCE.
In what sense is the narrator of the dream apart from the audience? And how would you assess such audience distinctions as the kind Peter Rabinowitz has theorized? If there’s compression in plot and image, there’s likely compression of audiences as well.
I VERY MUCH AGREE WITH THE RELEVANCE OF THESE ISSUES. HOW DREAMS ARE TOLD TO A VARIETY OF AUDIENCES... FOR INSTANCE.
In fact I imagine that for this teller-listener issue, Rabinowitz might be a good place to start, though of course he’s arguing about written narrative. But of course this kind of thing would be preliminary. I’m not sure how it could rendered into a qualitative code system.
Maybe the largest conceptual problem would be establishing what narrative is to mean in the first place.
IF WE GO BACK TO BASICS, A DEFINITION I LIKE IS: "NARRATIVE IS A RETROSPECTIVE REPRESENTATION OF A SEQUENCE OF INTERPRETED AND EVALUATED EVENTS" - WITH LOTS OF LEEWAY FOR FUZZY BORDERS AND PARTIAL NARRATIVITY IN CASES WHICH DON’T WHOLLY FIT THE DEFINITION.
Most dreams, I take it, won’t look so good by Aristotle’s standards.
I DARE SAY THEY WON’T!!
Dreams seem to take on much of their basic interest precisely because they wildly violate not just everyday storytelling norms, but also in some ways postmodern norms. Yet they must be taken as they are. They automatically carry a unique[?] kind of authenticity, precisely because they have been, originally, unconsciously ’told ’, and we have to take the report of that original telling as it is.
HERE PSYCHOANALYSIS DISAGREES. THENCE ITS RELEVANCE. I SHOULD SAY, NONETHELESS, THAT MOST OF MY DREAMS DON’T NEED A HEAVYWEIGHT LIKE FREUD TO COME AND INTEPRET THEM.
So dreams tend to fall outside the usual aesthetic and critical judgments. Would we ever have the notion of trying to get better at dreaming, as we do the notion of getting better at verbal or written storytelling?
THAT’S A GOOD ONE!
And if we did have that notion, what would it mean?
ENHANCED CENSORSHIP! MORE FODDER FOR FREUD!!!
Anyway, some thoughts & >Tony Jackson
SAME THING... ALL THE BEST, JOSE ANGEL

PS: I forgot to add, something which hasn’t been mentioned is that the usual narrative function of dreams is (apart as their "real-world" functions, or not quite apart) to act as a mise en abyme of the main narrative frame, or in any case as an interpretive device which helps organize, or problematize, the meaning of the main narrative sequence.

(PS: A narratological rereading of Freud’s Delirium and Dreams in Jensen’s "Gradiva" would seem to be in order).

La patata transgénica


Retroposts


—oOo—