Facts, R.I.P.
April 20, 2012, 10:49 pm
Posted by Paul Moses
A lot of people are talking about this obituary for Facts that appeared in the Chicago Tribune. Thought you might enjoy it. As Rex W. Huppke wrote:
To the shock of most sentient beings, Facts died Wednesday, April 18, after a long battle for relevancy with the 24-hour news cycle, blogs and the Internet. Though few expected Facts to pull out of its years-long downward spiral, the official cause of death was from injuries suffered last week when Florida Republican Rep. Allen West steadfastly declared that as many as 81 of his fellow members of the U.S. House of Representatives are communists.
Fails at being clever, mainly because it’s narrowly partisan. This sort of thing has been done before, of course – the writer is imitating something he read, probably in journalism class.
Anyway, as any clear-headed post-modern creature knows, facts are mythical animals. You can’t have it both ways.
Good one.
In his book On Bullshit, Harry G. Frankfurt describes what replaces facts. He distinguishes BS-ing from lying by saying that whether you tell the truth or lie, you assume that there are indeed facts that are in some way both determinate and knowable. But if you BS, you are indifferent to the truth. You are “offering a description of a certain state of affairs without genuinely submitting to the constraints which the endeavor to provide an accurate representation of reality imposes.”
An accurate representation of reality – what a concept!
David’s post infers anyone can say anything and that’s OK because facts are mythical anim,als.
No wonder we are in such deep doo doo.
David S. –
Since “facts are mythical”, why do you constantly bother to correct what other people say about them? Why do you even bother to assume that there are other people?
Here is a non fact. David thinks citing Rep West’s 81 Commie congressional Dems is narrowly partisan.
Merriam-Webster offers something that feels almost as reassuring as an old-fashioned fact.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/factoid
Definition of FACTOID
1 : an invented fact believed to be true because it appears in print
Or as Nietzsche quipped, there are no facts, only interpretations. It is the interpretive schema that we apply to facts that is the source of dispute. Eventually, the “facts” themselves become subject to the interpretation applied to them and they themselves do not provide any additional help in resolving the situation.
The Trayvon Martin shooting is a perfect example of this dynamic. It is a fact that Trayvon was shot dead and it is a fact that it was George Zimmerman who shot him. As a result of cell phone records, we know the timeline, and the sequence of events. And there are other facts that can be known.
But what does this all really mean; how are these and other “facts” interpreted that bring a whole other layer of meaning to those facts. The knowledge of the details of these facts does not bring us any closer to a judgement of what they mean legally, morally or ethically
As the Wizard sings in “Wicked”:
A man’s called a traitor – or liberator
A rich man’s a thief – or philanthropist
Is one a crusader – or ruthless invader?
It’s all in which label
Is able to persist
There are precious few at ease
With moral ambiguities
So we act as though they don’t exist
They call me “Wonderful”
So I am wonderful
In fact – it’s so much who I am
It’s part of my name
And with my help, you can be the same
I’m hoping Facts was an organ donor.
“I’m hoping Facts was an organ donor.” How wonderful! I’m putting that one in the same hilarious box carried around, I assume, by the person who, in a recent post, was clever enough to find a useful connection between navels and eyeballs. Now that’s an observant person! I do not, of course, have any idea what it means but it does sound like it would be fun to figure out.
This puts me in mind of a long-ago event (happened in 1968, once a fact-filled year, now…well, subject to interpretation and over-interpretation).
The event: traveling with a group of French students in April 1968, we are in Sarajevo (before it was subject to its supposed destruction in 1992-96), a tour guide has led us to the spot where Princip shot Archduke Ferdinand of Austria (thus launching that long-ago WWI [was it really a world war? a bevy of English and French historians think so]).
Event continued: The tour guide referred to Princip as a patriot. As his words moved back though our troupeau, the word assassin entered the discourse. And at the back of the line where we stood, Princip was said to be a terrorist (but that was in French). So I ask you, was there a World War I? Or was all of that simply a War on Terrorism?
Depending on your POV, we may or may not be still avenging the death of Archduke Ferdinand. Or maybe the Mrs. Who knows?
“Facts are the enemy of Truth” Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra.