Submitted by Maxwellsdemon17 t3_y75g2l in philosophy
The solution is to tell a better lie...
Assuming any articulation of meaning is necessarily a lie, than yes, kind of.
Myth might be a better term.
There are plenty of things that are useful for a society that aren't absolutely true- "All our citizens are equally important", or "We have a common purpose."
All these things are helpful since they distract from the frequently true statement, "We'd be better off if you guys were disenfranchised, enslaved, or dead."
he defines the difference (contextually) between a lie and a story:
>...stories give meaning to our world whereas lies ignore the world altogether. This is an important insight for contemporary politics, in which stories and narratives play a central role in shaping our political identity, but where they are also highly susceptible to a complete disregard for truth, reality, and history.
Stories used to manipulate are no better then lies used to the same effect.
so, novels are bad. we can't be emotionally manipulated or learn anything through allegory.
poems -unless they're written to be absolutely historically and scientifically correct- are bad too.
whatever planet you come from must be bland as fuck.
I guess it's a matter of intention. The politician is trying to control you while the author is trying to either entertain or reveal something to you via metaphor. The goal of the political metaphor is to manipulate the same way the old bad metaphors did. They are not for shining light on the truth but for controlling perspective. Metaphors with the goal of leading you with out regard for reality is no better then the lie. They serve the same purpose, to manipulate with disregard for the truth.
a politician is a salesperson; their job is to influence people via representation.
i expect a politician who shares my values to express those values in a positive light. i also expect a politician who doesn't share my values to state their own opinions in a positive light (because they, too, represent a constituency.) those are stories being told for the purpose of having me understand the issues and the available opinions/options on those issues.
the author of this essay is suggesting that "better stories" (one's that adhere to an objective truth while acknowledging divergent values) are the nexus of understanding and acceptance among divergent political factions.
obviously we have politicians lying big-time right now. according to the author's stated values those politicians could be telling better stories (as defined) instead of lying. and if they did so our political divisions would be less of an issue.
influencing people by representation is counter to the idea of representation. Working to change what people want when your job is to advocate for it, is in my opinion, corrupt. You are not representing people you are doing what you want. Useing metaphors to manipulate people in this way is very questionable in imo. I'm of the opinion that politicians are not thought leaders though. Although I could hear an argument about the president seeing as he is less of a representative and more of a leader so to speak.
>influencing people by representation is counter to the idea of representation
the people that my representative is influencing through representation are the other politicians whose votes will be needed to pass any given legislation.
that is how anything gets done in a representative democracy.
Oh, you right.
Are metaphors lies?
If they are told as if they are the truth when one believes there is no truth. Then it is a lie.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments