Also - for the best series of names ever, check out Bleak Expectations - satire of Great. Characters like Mr Gently Benevolent; Ripely Deliciously Temptingly Fecund; Mr. Skinflint Parsimonious and Flora Dies-Early do exactly what they say on the tin, or the complete opposite.
I guess I'm making a metaphysical claim - world-to-me is unavoidably structured by narrative conventions, and we can be continuists between fiction and this world-to-me. It is the case that the world as I will understand and experience it operates according to narrative conventions and this is all I have access to.
I should be on my guard against this storyboook understanding and cognitive biases - and be a discontinuist when making claims about the world-as-it-is (I resist the biases here). But world-to-me is unavoidably composed of narratively biased memory (so I don't think we can have norms about trying to resist this or not), and when I make claims about world-to-me I can be a continuist. And here, normatively (if I want to represent the world-to-me accurately), I should adopt the same kinds of reasoning as in fiction. If i apply word-as-is norms to world-to-me reasoning, I'll get it wrong - I'll be less accurate.
***
Roughly - it is not the case that I can predict that my child 'Frederick Very Successful' will be very successful. That's not how the real world works. The world is not nominatively determined, and I wouldn't bet on Frederick Very Successful's success.
But it is the case that I can predict that I will remember instances where people called 'Frederick Very Successful' have been Very Successful - I'll recall these much more easily. I could make another bet - that I'll perceive the world in such a way that it appears that Frederick Very Successful's tend to be more successful - because I'm biased to remember them in this way. As a result, I can predict that my understanding of the world (the world-to-me) will be dominated by these kinds of narrative conventions.
Then (if I have space) I want to argue for the significance of this claim. That 'The-World-To-Me' is dominated by narrative convention is important. That is all the world I have accessible to me - what I experience and what I can remember - practically (to me), this is all that exists. And if the predictions I make about this world suggest that it is structured by narrative convention, that seems important.
Sat in the cafe, and an older woman says I've been looking after a little girl called Sunshine. She was not a Sunshine, she would have been better called Demon for she was a little Demon.
Ovid Metamorphoses - the total coolness of his obsession with Medea - page 150 - the story slows right dow
Also - for the best series of names ever, check out Bleak Expectations - satire of Great. Characters like Mr Gently Benevolent; Ripely Deliciously Temptingly Fecund; Mr. Skinflint Parsimonious and Flora Dies-Early do exactly what they say on the tin, or the complete opposite.
I guess I'm making a metaphysical claim - world-to-me is unavoidably structured by narrative conventions, and we can be continuists between fiction and this world-to-me. It is the case that the world as I will understand and experience it operates according to narrative conventions and this is all I have access to.
I should be on my guard against this storyboook understanding and cognitive biases - and be a discontinuist when making claims about the world-as-it-is (I resist the biases here). But world-to-me is unavoidably composed of narratively biased memory (so I don't think we can have norms about trying to resist this or not), and when I make claims about world-to-me I can be a continuist. And here, normatively (if I want to represent the world-to-me accurately), I should adopt the same kinds of reasoning as in fiction. If i apply word-as-is norms to world-to-me reasoning, I'll get it wrong - I'll be less accurate.
***
Roughly - it is not the case that I can predict that my child 'Frederick Very Successful' will be very successful. That's not how the real world works. The world is not nominatively determined, and I wouldn't bet on Frederick Very Successful's success.
But it is the case that I can predict that I will remember instances where people called 'Frederick Very Successful' have been Very Successful - I'll recall these much more easily. I could make another bet - that I'll perceive the world in such a way that it appears that Frederick Very Successful's tend to be more successful - because I'm biased to remember them in this way. As a result, I can predict that my understanding of the world (the world-to-me) will be dominated by these kinds of narrative conventions.
Then (if I have space) I want to argue for the significance of this claim. That 'The-World-To-Me' is dominated by narrative convention is important. That is all the world I have accessible to me - what I experience and what I can remember - practically (to me), this is all that exists. And if the predictions I make about this world suggest that it is structured by narrative convention, that seems important.
Cornell - alone in the house on Utopia Parkway, he was ravaged by loneliness
Sat in the cafe, and an older woman says I've been looking after a little girl called Sunshine. She was not a Sunshine, she would have been better called Demon for she was a little Demon.