 |
| Things can only be what we think they are. We lack full perspective to see otherwise. (Apologies for the previous terrible formatting of this post, had to repost it entirely) |
Everything we think we know is really just a long string of historical invention, thought up by someone who was as equally insignificant as we all are. Fisher acknowledges Burke for referring to this dilemma as the "unending conversation" that we are all a part of as soon as we exist (Fisher, 381). It's unfortunate, because we are a part of this construct whether we agree with it or not, and cannot even be heard in our disagreement until we submit to the very construct we disagree with. With this perspective, it seems that we can only become significant in the big scheme if we become a notable contributor to the unending conversation. For those of us that accept this naturalism, there is comfort in having a clear cut task to become significant; study and critique the history of theories that came before you until you find an anomaly, then exploit that anomaly so that you will be remembered and quoted for truth, and the earlier theorist fades away with time. For those of us who find this naturalism oppressive, life can seem a bleak and pointless endeavor. While there is obviously no clear-cut meaning of life, the majority of us share the appetite for the pursuit of purpose. Upon realizing that all purpose fits into a construct set forth by a long string of dead people before me, who are only known today because the constructs of naturalism and literacy demand that they be known, it becomes obvious that everything is made up. Fisher speaks to this directly, noting, "the effects of naturalism have been to restrict the rational world paradigm to specialized studies and relegate everyday argument to an irrational exercise" (Fisher, 380). This quote really hit me hard, because I agree with it so whole-heartedly, yet it serves to undermine every dollar I've ever spent on college tuition. Some days, it's difficult to want to contribute to classroom discussions, because even in the biggest "AH HA!" moments, it's all really just an exercise that leads to nowhere and nothing, except another argument/conversation. This seems completely irrational when considered as a one-time event. It seems downright insane to do this over and over again for 4+ years, and PAY to do it. However, our narrative makes it rational because we have constructed the system in such a way that proof of 4+ years of irrational argument (also known as a Bachelor's Degree) leads to a higher probability of landing a decent paying job.
Wysocki-Eilola seem to be asking the right questions in regards to how we go about breaking out of this narrative shell. "Why aren't we instead working to come up with other terms and understandings--other more complex expressions--of our relationship with and within technologies?" (Wysocki-Eilola, 360). This question brings me right back to the issue of significance. I bet there are quite a few people that frequently use other terms and understandings to communicate complex expressions, but we'd likely interpret them as disturbed individuals, because they'd be speaking (or telepathing/miming/???) outside of our universe of understanding. These types of people have, in fact, come up with something *new*, but those of us within the standard narrative lack the perception to be able to interpret their communication with any amount of significance. I'm not suggesting that the mentally ill hold the secrets of the universe, but what I'm trying to illustrate is the fact that we have very limited perception, and the concepts that Wysocki/Eilola/Fisher are looking for can only lie outside of our perception, and therefore can never be seen until we open a third eye, so to speak. 
Adam—
ReplyDeleteSo I know you're not in my response group, but I have been mulling over (maybe sometimes agonizing over) almost exactly what you describe here myself. The increasing realization that all this Marvelous Theoretical Stuff is fascinating and useful only as long as it perpetuates an endless cycle, is, I have come to realize, what has probably historically been labeled 'Senioritis'. I've been thinking a lot lately that all this *stuff*, all this *knowledge* that all us thousands of students are running around and gaining— it's all way up here, way up in the sky-heights of theory. But lately, all I've been wanting to do lately is curl up with a blanket and relax with a cup of tea and all the stuff way, way down *here*. It's like, good God, can I just read a book or listen to an album and *not* have to vehemently agree or disagree with points of view or arguments?
I think where I've found some solace— or at least what I'm telling myself— is that somewhere way up there you can 'break through', back to the other side, as it were. You gain all this high-minded stuff, and then you end up right back to where you started. And things are good then, are better, really, because all that high-stuff is stacked nicely in the back of your head, and you don't really have to even think about it for it to be affecting every small thing you do in enriching ways. It just is.
I have heard it said that after untold years of learning about poetry and teaching poetry and reading and writing poetry, there was a morning when Robert Frost walked out onto the snow-dusted front porch of his secluded cabin and looked out over the silent woods. And 'Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening' just came to him, line by line, fully formed and nearly perfect. It came to him and he walked calmly to his desk and he penciled it down. He didn't even have to think; in a way, all his practice and all the thinking he had stored away just led him gently to that simple, quiet moment of small perfection.
Or who knows. Maybe the fucker would have thought up the poem even if he hadn't learned a lick of theory. Guess after who-knows how many thousands we've all put down in college education, we'll never know for ourselves now.
Anyway. Thanks for the post. It rang true.
Cheers.
—Ian
Adam,
ReplyDeleteIf I am comprehending your post right, you are basically answering one of the questions Doug proposed on the first day of class: Why does it all matter? I think what you are saying is that it matters because we have better chances of getting a better job than we are able to get prior to education. I like how you pointed out Burke’s notion of an “unending conversation.” It sometimes feels frustrating that we work so hard for 4+ years at studying and often feel little progression. This is one of the most challenging dilemmas of being a student. I’m thinking: dang, I’m amassing student loan debt here; hopefully it pays off in the end. Hopefully I can attain a job that will allow me to afford my tiny one bedroom apartment, and pay off my debts sometime before I die. This is one of the biggest challenges in academia, I feel, not attending class and completing the work it self, but the uncertain future. It is difficult to generate much insight until we are approaching our destination and can begin to visualize it. I can’t help but think of an old and probably inappropriate saying: “wish in one hand and shit in the other, and see which one fills up faster.” I am still hoping for a bright future, but the scary thing is that hope is often an empty emotion.
Cheers
Adam,
ReplyDeleteFirst, I love your opening picture. It reminds me of what I've been learning in my Classical Sociological Theory class. We've discussed the Modern idea of Socrates's The Cave. Long story short, Socrates creates a world in which prisoners in a cave have no understanding of the outside world; all they know is their cave. They were born there, probably should have mentioned that... Anyway these prisoners are chained and can only see shadows on the wall. They see people and camels and other objects walk behind them, yet can only see what their shadows portray on the wall, thus they cannot fully understand what other things or beings are, they just know what they see. The whole point of this was for Socrates to prove that knowledge is limited to some, but that doesn't mean that "unknown" knowledge is any less real. The world outside this cave was no less real than the world inside the cave, even though the prisoners could not know or understand it.
This is kind of how rhetoric is; just because I don't understand it or know it, doesn't mean it's not real. Thanks for the cool connection :)
I love how you explored the connection between culture and history; everything we know (or think to know, as you said) is just part of a history that some random person invented. It's interesting that one person's idea of what was good and right, and maybe this became majority thought during the time, but still, became what we STILL practice as our culture. One thing that comes to mind (and this may not be a super worthwhile example...) is the idea of The American Dream. Ever since America's independence, the concept that any person, at any time, from any culture or social class could become anything he or she dreamed of if they put in enough hard work. It's interesting that "dream" is still (to some people, maybe?) taught and encouraged for people growing up and going through the process of becoming a functional member of society. It's also amusing that this concept came about during America's independence, when we KNOW that not "all men" were equal. But we also know Jefferson, who "wrote" this declaration and was "significant" at the time didn't give any fucks.
Sorry for all the quotations.
I also appreciated your comment about education being irrational. We do the same things over and over again for four years (or more!) and pay hundreds of thousands of dollars (some people spend all their lives in debt because of it) just to get a piece of paper proving you're significant. And yet, we NEED this piece of paper to get a job and support ourselves. That seems pretty rational then... What you're arguing, at least what I picked up from it, is that our culture and history and dickheads like Thomas Jefferson who lived hundreds of years ago decided what was right, and we still accept and perform these practices without any thought. Was, then, our narrative created and decided for us long ago, by people who are so old that we'll never know anything about them, who were maybe significant, and our job, our role in society and our cultural narrative is to just do it?
Now I'm just picturing Shia Labeouf....
-Alex