I’ve come to accept that reality is far less important to our daily lives than narratives.
I mean, it’s a real depressing understanding of the world, but after you embrace it, you learn to work around it and it can even be a huge asset or tool for getting results and interacting with others.
For me personally, I want to learn the disappointing truth about everything, but for the vast majority of people, they will live their whole lives without ever needing or wanting to learn who actually said or did what in history. It’s fine. We can keep building stories to influence people to do better things. There is no cosmic arbiter of truth who is going to judge people for spreading a story that leads to better outcomes.
I get where they’re coming from. It isn’t that mis/dis-information is good. It’s just that they aren’t going to get the accurate information anyway.
For example, who actually created this university? Can you tell me? Does it actually matter? If this story causes good outcomes, where otherwise there would be a void of information which could be filled by someone else, then the story that causes good is the best option.
You say “yes” as if that means something. How? What changes if we just leave the gap of knowledge unfilled?
You didn’t answer who created it. You did t say what would happen. You just said “yes” as if that alone is enough justification. What good does it do? If the gap is instead filled with mysoginist religious garbage, what’s the benefit from telling people this isn’t true?
For people un-effected, fine. Let them know. For people who benefit from it, or who don’t hurt others because of it, what is gained? This isn’t answered by just saying “yes.” Put more effort in or I assume you don’t actually have any reason.
Lol. “You can look it up.” That’s the entire issue here. Looking it up it says it’s the woman in the OP. However, she was only written about several centuries later and, according to Wikipedia at least, “her story has been hard to substantiate and some modern historians doubt her existence.”
If you think that’s enough then you agree with me and this other person. The story, though we can’t substantiate it, is good enough to keep telling it. It doesn’t really matter that it may be wrong. Insisting instead that we don’t really know who created it so shouldn’t say anyone did isn’t useful.
It’s a pretty dumb trolly problem if you rather truth that hurts people than a fairy tale that actually helps people.
What’s crazy is holding onto the ideal that you can get everyone on the same page, interpreting the same things the same way. Our entire civilization is build on a palace of lies we will never have truth for, so I find I don’t feel bothered if people take inspiration from someone who may or may not have existed.
I was going to talk about our social acceptance of religion despite even knowing it does objective harms to society, but then I realized you’re being performative and don’t really care or you wouldn’t have to put words in my mouth. I won’t see whatever else you have to tell me I am saying.
It’s funny because we allow people to believe whatever crazy, insane fairy tales they want about what magic sky wizard is the real magic sky wizard and even if those beliefs do harm, we say “well that’s their belief.”
I’m saying, if people are going to live in fantasy land, tell better fucking stories because our world is literally burning down on the backs of performative shits sitting on the computer being smug about what their perfect future looks like.
I don’t agree here. Truth is important. The fact that women haven’t been visible in science is important. We need to explain why they weren’t visible. Creating historical figures is comforting but if their existence is not reliably documented, we should keep explaining why such figures couldn’t emerge, and why their absence is significant.
Yes to shitposts, no to fabrications (this lady looks like one - but I suppose it was in good faith)
What if the truth can’t be known as Ibn Abi Zar only wrote on this 500 years later and archaeological evidence is not definitive but the story has inspired countless young women in the Islamic world to pursue higher learning?
If an unverifiable story accomplishes the outcome of improving the visibility of women in science and higher education in general, how should we judge that? Would only 100% verifiable truth still take all precedence?
Finally, we have to ask why did this story (if it really is just a story) capture so many imaginations? What cultural current at the time made this gain popularity? Was there a thirst for women to be seen in this light that he was looking to quench?
The humanities may be considered a soft science but it’s just as important as science in my view.
Is it possible they did hear and it was not written down?
Or it was written down and someone had reason to destroy the evidence?
You’ve mentioned patriarchal orthodoxy. Could it be that there were powerful individuals that did not like the idea of a woman being credited with this accomplishment?
I think that both are important and can be used together as a tool. Idealism grounded in materialism. The legend itself is a tool for further discussions and inspiration. There’s a lot of power in simple ideas.
OK, I get your point - but I think then that it should be clearer if we’re talking about a historical figure or a legend. In this particular case, it’s a bit fuzzy unfortunately. Ancient historians and all that.
Science is a conversation, just like the Humanities. :) Being wrong is okay, it’s just a chance for further discussions. That’s why I encourage a bit of freeform experimenting in this space.
You know that episode of The Simpsons where Lisa hides the fact the town founder is a bad person because it’d make the town sad?
That is me trying to hold back that, upon research (reading the Wikipedia page), I found out that Fatima al-Fihriya is probably not a real person :(
I’ve come to accept that reality is far less important to our daily lives than narratives.
I mean, it’s a real depressing understanding of the world, but after you embrace it, you learn to work around it and it can even be a huge asset or tool for getting results and interacting with others.
For me personally, I want to learn the disappointing truth about everything, but for the vast majority of people, they will live their whole lives without ever needing or wanting to learn who actually said or did what in history. It’s fine. We can keep building stories to influence people to do better things. There is no cosmic arbiter of truth who is going to judge people for spreading a story that leads to better outcomes.
Its not healthy to bury yourself in a false reality.
Thats some crazy ass shit.
I care more about outcomes nowadays far more than if everyone is on the same page, that’s never going to happen.
This is a crazy take. Misinformation is not all of the sudden good when it has a positive outcome.
I get where they’re coming from. It isn’t that mis/dis-information is good. It’s just that they aren’t going to get the accurate information anyway.
For example, who actually created this university? Can you tell me? Does it actually matter? If this story causes good outcomes, where otherwise there would be a void of information which could be filled by someone else, then the story that causes good is the best option.
Yes. You can look it up and see. Or even read more comments further down talking about it.
Yes it matters.
You say “yes” as if that means something. How? What changes if we just leave the gap of knowledge unfilled?
You didn’t answer who created it. You did t say what would happen. You just said “yes” as if that alone is enough justification. What good does it do? If the gap is instead filled with mysoginist religious garbage, what’s the benefit from telling people this isn’t true?
For people un-effected, fine. Let them know. For people who benefit from it, or who don’t hurt others because of it, what is gained? This isn’t answered by just saying “yes.” Put more effort in or I assume you don’t actually have any reason.
What gap are you talking about? Yes you can look it up who created it.
No I didn’t answer who created it because… you can look it up. The information exists.
I don’t really need to put more effort into an answer because it doesn’t need it.
Lol. “You can look it up.” That’s the entire issue here. Looking it up it says it’s the woman in the OP. However, she was only written about several centuries later and, according to Wikipedia at least, “her story has been hard to substantiate and some modern historians doubt her existence.”
If you think that’s enough then you agree with me and this other person. The story, though we can’t substantiate it, is good enough to keep telling it. It doesn’t really matter that it may be wrong. Insisting instead that we don’t really know who created it so shouldn’t say anyone did isn’t useful.
It’s a pretty dumb trolly problem if you rather truth that hurts people than a fairy tale that actually helps people.
What’s crazy is holding onto the ideal that you can get everyone on the same page, interpreting the same things the same way. Our entire civilization is build on a palace of lies we will never have truth for, so I find I don’t feel bothered if people take inspiration from someone who may or may not have existed.
Yeah but why not just find someone who actually existed to be inspired by instead of a lie?
“We don’t know so we might as well not bother learning” is also an incredibly wild take.
I was going to talk about our social acceptance of religion despite even knowing it does objective harms to society, but then I realized you’re being performative and don’t really care or you wouldn’t have to put words in my mouth. I won’t see whatever else you have to tell me I am saying.
I also don’t like religion for the same reason.
👆 This is how we get Trump and reactionaries, it’s this idiotic take right here.
It’s funny because we allow people to believe whatever crazy, insane fairy tales they want about what magic sky wizard is the real magic sky wizard and even if those beliefs do harm, we say “well that’s their belief.”
I’m saying, if people are going to live in fantasy land, tell better fucking stories because our world is literally burning down on the backs of performative shits sitting on the computer being smug about what their perfect future looks like.
I thought the antirealists were anarchists
Hey cool a soulist
Difficult to verify does not mean untrue.
Sometimes legends are important.
I don’t agree here. Truth is important. The fact that women haven’t been visible in science is important. We need to explain why they weren’t visible. Creating historical figures is comforting but if their existence is not reliably documented, we should keep explaining why such figures couldn’t emerge, and why their absence is significant.
Yes to shitposts, no to fabrications (this lady looks like one - but I suppose it was in good faith)
What if the truth can’t be known as Ibn Abi Zar only wrote on this 500 years later and archaeological evidence is not definitive but the story has inspired countless young women in the Islamic world to pursue higher learning?
If an unverifiable story accomplishes the outcome of improving the visibility of women in science and higher education in general, how should we judge that? Would only 100% verifiable truth still take all precedence?
Finally, we have to ask why did this story (if it really is just a story) capture so many imaginations? What cultural current at the time made this gain popularity? Was there a thirst for women to be seen in this light that he was looking to quench?
The humanities may be considered a soft science but it’s just as important as science in my view.
Or, if she did exist but almost nobody heard about her in the 500 years after her death, why would that have happened?
(Not taking a position on her existence, but thinking about Hatshepsut and many women whose accomplishments were ignored, hidden, or credited to men)
Is it possible they did hear and it was not written down?
Or it was written down and someone had reason to destroy the evidence?
You’ve mentioned patriarchal orthodoxy. Could it be that there were powerful individuals that did not like the idea of a woman being credited with this accomplishment?
I think that both are important and can be used together as a tool. Idealism grounded in materialism. The legend itself is a tool for further discussions and inspiration. There’s a lot of power in simple ideas.
OK, I get your point - but I think then that it should be clearer if we’re talking about a historical figure or a legend. In this particular case, it’s a bit fuzzy unfortunately. Ancient historians and all that.
Science is a conversation, just like the Humanities. :) Being wrong is okay, it’s just a chance for further discussions. That’s why I encourage a bit of freeform experimenting in this space.
Lies that white wash one of the most horrendous religions in the world are indeed important - just not the way you imply.