= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
CCC comments on Rationality Quotes February 2014 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (482)
As far as sad stories go, I do believe that one particularly famous example can be found in Romeo And Juliet (Shakespeare). Some people actually do enjoy a well-written sad story; there's even a whole page on tvtropes called "Downer Ending" which lists a lot of sad stories, some of which are actually quite well-written and thought-provoking.
I don't think they were all written with the explicit intention of being sad stories, though. I imagine that quite a few were written with the intention of, instead of provoking an emotional response, rather provoking some other response. For example, Flowers for Algernon (I don't know if you're familiar with it) is most certainly a sad story, especially near the end; but the intention seems to be to inspire thought and raise questions rather than to inspire emotion. (It also won a few awards; sad stories don't necessarily fail).
So, yes, while inspiring emotion is one reason to write stories, even a common reason, it is far from the only reason.
(I don't know the formatting yet, so when I use capitalized words here, I'm just doing it for emphasis, not to yell at you, of course)
Hi CCC,
That is a great thing to bring up, and very important. There are indeed stories, like Flowers for Algernon (or my favorite example, almost every episode of the original Twilight Zone), that quite clearly exist to give IDEAS instead of what appears to be basic emotions. And this leads us to one of the most eye-opening conclusions I ever had about storytelling.
You see...YES, some stories ARE primarily intended to inspire thought and raise questions, BUT...and here's one of the things that was a "eureka moment" for me...getting those new ideas...those inspiring ideas or things to think about...ALSO give us a positive emotion...and THAT positive emotion...a feeling I refer to as "enlightenment"...IS why those stories exist.
This is exactly why I say (and I'm sure others say) that a good scientist has to BE right, regardless of how he sounds, but a good storyteller has to SOUND right, regardless of whether or not he actually is right.
Quick example...THIS is why creation-myths are so popular as stories. They aren't actually RIGHT, but they are plausible enough to satisfy the curiosity of the ancient people who heard them. They wanted to know where the Sun came from. The idea that Horus created it (or a chariot pulled it across the sky), did the job for them nicely, so that story was successful and spread through the culture. If you had tried to tell them about gravity as a physical force, it wouldn't have involved things they understood, so it wouldn't have worked. It would've been fine for science, but would've failed to spread, interest and capture the imagination of the audience, which is basically what a great story does.
There are plenty of ways this applies, and lots of ways we get these feelings of new, useful or satisfying ideas from stories...but it is indeed one major thing that stories can do. But I hope I did a decent job here of describing how it fits with this idea of stories existing to generate emotion.
When typing a reply notice that to the right of the "comment" button is a "help" button. You now know how to do emphasis without yelling.
There are all manner of ways that message boards do their formatting and give information about their formatting. "Help" buttons, absent any additional labeling, aren't necessarily quick formatting lists, they might talk about dozens of things that people may require help with, such as forum standards of conduct, how the rules for thread starting, karma, your personal page and so on function before they get to such smaller issues, if they do so at all. Likewise, formatting itself may simply rely on users being already familiar with HTML tags or bracket-style functions. So absent your pre-existing knowledge of where it is, it is not so automatically clear to those who are new.
Please keep this in mind when you speak to others in the future, as your incorrect hindsight bias appears to have effected your tone.
I know. This is why my instructions consisted of new information. You expressed ignorance (by way of excuse). That's fine, once. And by social convention in exchange for not getting downvoted to oblivion for yelling, that expression of ignorance obligates you to listen when you get an explanation you prompted with some modicum of grace. It isn't condescension if you literally ask for it.
It so happens that it took me several years before it occurred to me that the 'help' button showed formatting help. Prior to that I referred people to the markdown boards after deducing what formatting system was being used by googling what how reddit-clones work. When I say "you now have" I meant that literally, with the direct implication "you did not previously have".
Your mind reading is flawed. (Come to think of it, it is verifiably flawed. If we really cared we could look at the public record of conversations held in past "welcome, formatting guide" discussions.)
Now, let me revise my earlier instruction to something more appropriate to someone with your tone, so that we are abundantly clear. It'll also give you some much needed contrast so you will be better able to identify actual abrasive tone. I do use it (and endorse it) sometimes, just not in response to implied format guide queries. Typically it is in response to people combining aggression or condescension with being wrong.
Please do not YELL at people on this forum. Ignorance was once an excuse but only barely... it was still lazy, unnecessary and mildly disrespectful. People write entire novels without without once relying on formatting for emphasis and their books tend to be better for it. Now you have been given simple instructions that take only several seconds to follow continuing to do so would be obnoxious and treated as a defection against the community.
No, I'm sorry, but this nonsense is not worth the digression.
Earlier in this topic I noticed already that you used the term "ceretus paribus," which is flat-out wrong. The term is "ceteris paribus." I could just as easily have replied to you in a snide manner telling you to go to google and put in that word you found and "now you know not to say that again." But I choose not to because it's not necessary or constructive to address people that way, and when viewed in the proper light, you understand that a simple overlap of one's knowledge where someone else lacks knowledge is not evidence nor justification for me to try to speak down to them.
Please learn this and figure out how to conduct yourself better in the future in your interactions with people.
Huh. I never thought of it that way.
Hmmm... some stories might be designed as warnings (this is what happens if you throw too many nuclear bombs about!), or to try to get more people to work on a difficult problem (this is what happens if we don't solve world hunger!) or to try to promote a worldview (this is why my proposed political system is the best!). In the latter two cases, they would work best if they also inspire a positive emotional response, encouraging more people to share the story; in these cases, as with the thought-inspiring stories, inspiring a positive emotion is not the major aim of the story, but it is an important part of the story nonetheless.
This still leaves the warning story; the story of the person who went down a dark path, and comes out the worse for it. Hmmm... now that I think about it, I guess such a story could be written to appeal to a sort of feeling of moral superiority, a sort of smugness, a "I-wouldn't-be-so-evil" sort of feeling. (I'm not sure that that's necessarily a positive emotion, but it is a pleasant one).
Hmmm. You raise a surprisingly good point. I'm sure there are still counterexamples out there (how would you class Macbeth, for example?) but they're clearly a lot rarer then I'd thought.
Hi CCC,
This is very exciting. I was hoping to be able to share some of my ideas here about this field with rational-minded people and see if they found them interesting (I find this site's content and its members extremely interesting), and even this little chat here is quite encouraging.
Anyway, there are certainly stories that are designed with an agenda (like you said, as warnings) or to get people to care about something. BUT, if the story doesn't actually work and doesn't feel correct to people, it won't be effective. For example (and I hope this is a good example), imagine if we took a story that illustrated the Big Bang back to some of our ancient ancestors. They would laugh us out of the village (if they didn't kill us) and tell us that Vishnu created the Universe in a flower from his belly. In this case, our story has failed, even though we had the intent to tell them something extremely important and much more true than what they already believed.
Now, the second point you brought up is great, and it is indeed separate from giving "enlightenment". Which is the story of a person who goes down the dark path and fails. This is a fine story obviously and many successful stories (like tragedies) take this form. But while these are not giving us a NEW idea, instead, they're UNDERLINING what we already believe or know is true, which ALSO feels very good, though not QUITE as good as enlightenment. I label this, underlining what we know, as "Confirmation." And in short, THIS is why we want to see the right guy get the girl, and people who have tragic flaws suffer from them, and why Batman can't lose in the end (and you'd better not try it if you write the new Batman movie). We expect (though we may not know it consciously) movies to give us that feeling in the end...that what we believe is true, in this case that the person who shows the good traits eventually wins.
I actually haven't been able to read Shakespeare yet, (the Old English is a tough barrier for me), but I do intend to...and we may find that Macbeth gives this feeling of confirmation, as many tragedies do, which is why it functions well.
Anyway if I get started this post will run all day. But I hope this is interesting and makes sense. I'm using this exchange as a measure for whether or not people might like posts on this topic.
That depends on what level of causation you're talking about. Even then it helps if the story gives good advice since it's more likely to be passed on if the person doing the passing was successful.
Hi Eugine,
One thing I noticed earlier about my post that you quoted is that I should've added that the positive emotion we get from new ideas is quite verifiable as a pleasure chemical in the brain (I think dopamine), so it didn't look like I was simply throwing new ideas in as positive emotion after the fact.
Anyway, it seems like you're saying good advice will help a story spread because it's more likely to be felt as right. And in one way that makes sense, but it's not always true and I wouldn't rely on that. Audiences very much enjoy things that have no chance of being true (like The Incredible Hulk or pretty much anything in the Avengers), as long as you make it believable enough that they can feel that it's true while they're watching...and the other positive emotions that you create with that thing can far outweigh something more mundane but accurate. (which is one way of explaining why the Hulk and other superheroes are so popular)
So I wouldn't agree that it helps to give good advice in a story. If we can find a way to make the good information believable to our audience, then great. But if we can't, then building a story around it will cause us to fail. We might succeed as scientists, since we have the best intentions and the best theory, but we will fail as storytellers.
I hope this makes sense.
How is this relevant to anything?
No, I'm saying that good advice will help a story spread because it makes the person listening to the story more successful and thus better able to spread it to others.
In the sense of superpowers not existing, I agree. In the sense that superheroes represent how heroes should act in some sense, the story is indeed true on that level.
I didn't want my earlier post to appear to anyone as though I was "band-aiding" my statement by adding the category of new ideas to my initial statement of things being for positive emotion after new ideas were brought up. But since you both had already replied, I thought it might be confusing to go back and edit it. As I'm sure you understand, we can't always express ourselves perfectly and since you quoted that exact part, I figured I'd mention it.
Ah, but the person will only listen to the story and tell it to others if it feels true to them in the first place. If we want to spread an actual true idea amongst that group, it better be coupled with things that feel good or feel right to them. Thus, since feeling right will make the story spread regardless of its truth, and truth will only spread if its coupled with feeling right, I maintain that feeling right is the primary factor.
Yes, and we responded to that as audience members. But we also responded to the excitement that's created by the action scenes, which we would never have put in the story if our primary goal was to be accurate instead of to find what makes the most feeling.
Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that truth in general is not a good thing. It's probably even the best thing when it comes to what we discuss. But in terms of what makes stories successful, I've found that truth simply isn't primary, though I've seen it often stated as though it is.
All the best to you.