FeedBurner FeedCount

14 July 2008

As writing goes, so goes the ability to discern truth, as truth goes, so goes the democracy

Language Truth & Logic, and the Essay Form

If we are simply a nation which absorbs information through sound bites (see below) and have become "visual junkies" deficient in our abilities to read information in full context, how can we be literate users of information in the world-at-large? That is, how can we be good consumers in a consumer marketplace, or more importantly, truly informed voters in a democratic republic? If we cannot write or think in a literate fashion, how can we test the truth of an idea?

The argument for writing literacy (the essay and documented paper form) goes like this: If a means of verifying truth is brought by studying the propositions found in sentences, and sentences are used to build arguments in everything from commercial promotions to political speeches, then we need to teach writing as a means of thinking. In this way writing can be used by a thoughtful public to improve its own social condition. Here, we are not referring to elementary reading and writing, that is, merely decoding language in order to read a cereal box or scribble on a Post-it note, but something much more.

Have we become reduced to a society of specialists who may be "numerate" ("good at counting beans") and who increasingly turn to electronic games for diversion, or can we return to mid twentieth century form and once again value literacy (skill at using language as a tool for thinking)?

In mid last century, philosophers (logical positivists) like Alfred Jules Ayer spent their careers trying to determine, through language, how ideas can be verified. These people might have been moved by their experience of living through the attack on language (and democracy) brought by Fascism. Nevertheless, what concerned them then should concern us now. (Isn't it obvious?). We must decide if such endeavors in our schools (and out of them--grownups can continue to practice thinking!) are useful or not. Or, do we prefer the narcotized state of the world of sound bites and meaningless visual glitter currently raining down upon us? Has our ability to think become so much confetti?

Soundbite: In film and broadcasting a soundbite is a very short piece of footage taken from a longer speech or an interview in which someone with authority or the average "man on the street" says something which is considered by those who edit the speech or interview to be the most important point. As the context of what is being said is missing, the insertion of soundbites into news broadcasts or documentaries is open to manipulation and thus requires a very high degree of journalistic ethics. Politicians of the new generation are carefully coached by their spin doctors to produce on-demand sound bites which are clear and to the point.

Professor Ayer, referred to above, formulated that a sentence can only be meaningful if it has verifiable empirical import, otherwise it is either "analytical" if tautologous, or "metaphysical" (i.e. meaningless, or "literally senseless"). (Wikipedia).

Don't be daunted by all this. Get with it. Support writing as a tool for thinking. The essay form remains an unexcelled platform to teach thinking and to test it in others. How many of us "numerate bean counters" are truly literate?

Subscribe to Sentenceparts How's your English today?

No comments: