Speculation

At a loss for something to write on, but desiring to write, I return to a topic that I have tackled a number of times: the place of Speculative Fiction. I admit, it's something of a pet theme of mine.

For those of you not up on your literary terminology, Speculative Fiction (as opposed to Mundane Fiction) is the part of the book store where you find science fiction, fantasy, and usually horror. It also includes a number of works commonly put in the "Literature" section, such as the writing of Stephen King, Haruki Murakami, Franz Kafka, and other such authors that stray from a realistic portrayal of the world in their writing.

Now, one of my favorite authors, Neal Stephenson, has already given a lecture on the subject, but I wish to say more.

I was taught in the Jesuit Tradition, and one of my good friends (and I'd consider him a mentor, for even though he never taught a class I was in, I still learned a great deal from him) Brother Glenn Kerfoot, S.J., insisted that science fiction has a definite place in Catholic--especially Jesuit--Theological thinking. I took this idea, and expanded it outward somewhat, and found that it has a place in all thinking, but first I'll give you his explanation.

In short, the idea is that God constantly intervenes in the world. Despite the bad things, we can see the hands of God at work; the faculty for seeing this comes to us in the form of imagination. Therefore, by reading Speculative Fiction and exercising our imagination, we are increasing our capacity to see God's will at work in our lives.

I like this, but I understand that many of my friends are secular, so allow me to present to you an alternative explanation that leaves out metaphysical speculation:

We can agree that Speculative Fiction increases your ability to imagine, to visualize things that are not (in some cases, "are not as of yet.") Do you think that the Imagination is unimportant? There is no human endeavor which doesn't require a certain degree of mental flexibility; even digging a ditch requires you to imagine obstacles so that you can prepare for them. Therefore, reading Speculative Fiction is an important part of improving your mind.

The important part isn't the accuracy of the speculation--the most accurate picture of the future I've yet read was Stephenson's Snow Crash, which predicted Google Earth, the economic crisis, the rise of the megachurch and a dozen other things, but included full 3-D virtual reality for the internet and the collapse of the US government. It was a brilliant read, but it did not show the modern world.

It showed another way of conceiving events, and that is the important part.

Tribal Theory

In his essay, The Temporary Autonomous Zone, anarchist thinker Hakim Bey noted suggested that the fundamental unit of human society is not, and should not be considered to be, the nuclear family. Instead, he stated that the earlier model of the "Band" or "Tribe" is a more natural way of arranging things.

Personally, I think that Hakim Bey had a number of very good, well-thought out ideas. However, associating with him and his ideas comes with a certain amount of moral baggage with which I am not entirely comfortable. There are a number of inconsistencies in his thought which can easily be picked out, leaving something behind which can still be usable, despite the author's status as a nut-bar.

This idea of the importance of the "Tribe" in human culture shows up elsewhere. Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.'s idea of the Karass and Granfalloon in the fictitious religion of Bokononism are a good example, as is the Japanese word "Nakama" (often translated as "friends" or "comrades," though this is a best-fit translation, and it is still not quite accurate.)

In my opinion, the Tribe is an ancillary social structure, not replacing but including the family. Your "social circle," your "clique," your "friends and family" form your tribe. It isn't an artificial thing, but an emergent group identity that comes out of your associations. Take, for example, the Beats--Kerouac, Cassady, Ginsberg, and co.--they associated with one another because they were friends, but developed a new group identity and common purpose over the course of their travels and writing.

Another, more modern example (and one only really understandable to some people in the Kansas City Metropolitan Area) would be KCDIY--a group of like-minded people in the Kansas City area--and this comraderie extends to the families of those involved. I'm certain that everyone has observed something of the sort.

Please note, however, that I'm not referring to corporations or businesses. Though a Tribe can form from people who work together, they are not a priori a Tribe. The reason I would give for this is that a Tribe is an emergent thing that comes out of a group of people; an identity that contains other identities; a shared loyalty to the same unspoken thing.

It is also my opinion that a consciousness of the "tribe" to which you belong is growing ever more important in the modern era. Look at Modernist Poetry and the works of the Lost Generation (examples given) for an analogy. As the world grows (metaphorically) smaller, each of us is forced to realize that we are but one among many, a truth that brings about a sort of nihilating alienation.

My belief is that a tribe can be a bastion for individual identity, taking refuge from the mechanistic forces at work in our society that work to erode us and put us in cubicles.

Useful Lies

Lately, I've been thinking a lot about education. This might have something to do with the fact that I need to apply to graduate schools. Also, several of my friends work as substitute teachers in schools in the area. But I've come up with a theory of education.

We are not taught facts: what we are taught is useful lies. Allow me to explain.

One of my professors takes a true/false survey of his freshman composition classes. He asks "can you begin a sentence with 'and' or 'but?'"

When they respond with "false," he replies "But you can. And you do."

Another lie is that we are taught to think of electrons, protons, and neutrons--the whole zoo of subatomic particles--are real things. In fact, these are just the most useful explanations for the equations. The physical sciences are riddled with such best-fit explanations; this is not to say that they are absolutely false, but it is not correct to say that they are absolutely true.

This brings me to the point of this post--that we are not taught real facts in schools, simply given ideas that allow us to function in the world until we're ready for the real ideas. Come on, think about it: how often have you taken an advanced class, only to find out that what you learned in the intro course "--isn't exactly true..."

But even though it isn't true, these lies are still usable and convenient in certain, limited situations. In physics, we first learn Newtonian mechanics, even though most modern physics has focused solely on disproving Newton, finding contexts in which his laws of motion don't apply. They're good for a starting point, and still apply in particular contexts, even though they're not absolutely true.

But I suspect that these useful lies are best when you're aware of their nature--you know that they're not absolutely true, but they're a means you can use to get through the problems you're faced with.

Thesis

This is a place for philosophy; for social criticisms; for theories; in short, a place for ideas.

As for me, I know what I consider myself to be. I think of myself as intelligent and as eloquent in writing. I might be wrong, I’m open to the idea.

What I put down here are not absolutes. These are my ideas, and I encourage you to take them as you would. Accept them or reject them, but think of them, at the very least.

This is not the news. This is not editorial. This is, quite simply, a collection of thoughts and seeds for discussion. It’s not about me, but I’m not going to filter myself out: like everyone, I come as a package deal with biases and neuroses, and I’m not going to pretend to be objective.

The title is a double reference. Heideggar wrote Being and Time, a cornerstone of Heuristic Phenomenology. Later, Jean-Paul Sartre wrote Being and Nothingness, a cornerstone of Existential Phenomenology.

This is Being and Context. I’m fascinated by how things are interconnected--how the world is discontinuous but not discrete. This is most likely a product of my education, and will be reflected in what follows.