Recently in class we have discussed this idea of “what is truth” who are we really behind “screens” and which one of us is our real self. I find this to be a fascinating yet mind stretching phenomena. Why does this question really even exist? Why are we as individuals not the same person whether it be in person or behind screens? Are we this superficial to believe that there is no person who is the same on both levels? Perhaps we see ourselves as obtaining this trait and then project in on those around us. Of course we all have a different side to us as people, but is this necessarily something we would question our true personality over? In a sense I believe having this multiple attitudes and beliefs is in fact what makes up our true self.
When I think what is truth, I believe this concept is whatever you as a person believe it to be. Truth can be something you force yourself to believe, something that is not entirely true and is accepted as truth, or even a blatant lie that is simply believed. Truth is however a person interprets what is being told in my eyes. Someone in class talked about sterotypes and the difference between where they would place themselves and where society would place them. For a certain individual, where they are to place themselves is their truth, this is where they belong in their eyes, but what of society. If society feels they belong somewhere else, isn’t this a truth in societies perspective wherever they place this individual. The lens can change and alter what the truth is of the same situation I think, and I believe this is the key when we think about this term.
It interests me that after we read Derrida we find that ideas and words and the likes can be moved from one person to another where the receiver may be physically absent at the time the idea is trying to be relayed. From this starting point to its receivers ending point, there can be a drastic change in meaning, tone, or context. The same is true in dealing with people. As a person tries to portray themselves through blogging, plurking, facebook etc, there personalities are interrupted with misinterpretation, which is what I believe Derrida understands happens when we delay the relay of communication. This of course than brings me back to Austin who says what really are words? If there is so much room for interpretation and misguided truth, what do these words really mean, and what should they mean?
This of course brings us full circle I suppose to why communicate? We must be accepting of misinterpretation, whether this means risking being placed in the wrong stereotype or are assumed a different person behind “screens”. I like to believe that the same person is projected for me through plurk as anyone would see in class, but I wonder if this is what others think? If I had a name that had nothing to do with my own name on plurk, would the class be able to link my plurking thoughts to the thoughts and statements I make in class? This topic is unanswerable I think for me because there are number ways to look at these terms, and what the meaning overall means to anyone can be significantly different.
No comments:
Post a Comment