Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Overcoming Bias Commenter's avatar

(i say this without having read the other comments - their combined length seems about four times that of the article itself).

Fiction's insights are implicit, philosophy's are explicit. In fiction aiming at a reasonable-level of realisim, the author is aiming at working out a realistic scenario.

They are usually trying to highlight certain features of that scenario, and because of this, it is designed for the reader to draw certain conclusions about it (e.g. about the nature of NGOs).

But what the author explicitly specifies is the scenario - the conclusions and, in particular, the model of why those conclusions are the case, is left somewhat implicit.

We are pretty good at evaluating concrete descriptions of scenarios, which helps the author to construct a reasonably realistic scenario.

Philosophers, on the other hand, tend to work on the level of general models: general descriptions that are abstracted away from specific scenarios. Descriptions that explicitly talk about why certain things are the case, /in general/.

These are harder for us to evaluate. And it is harder for us to incorporate nauances within models than within stories.

I'm not trying to say that stories "are better". I think that's why there is value to be had in both, and personally, I'm more interested in trying to draw the general, explicit lessons - the kind of thing philsophy is more targed at.

Expand full comment
Overcoming Bias Commenter's avatar

The heart might know things the mind knows nothing of, but the heart cant' be challenged. Literature and the arts can provide insights, but reason and philosophical thought allow ideas to be developed, analyzed challenged and determined to be correct or incorrect based on the standard of reason. Ideas challenged create the structure by which civilization's ideas of Truth advance. Good literature (and the arts in general) doesn't have to be reasonable to convey a message of Truth (it has to convey a message of Truth to be good however) and therefore can't be reasonably determined to be correct or incorrect.

Just my 2 cents...

Expand full comment
36 more comments...