The world is not equally split in primacy and latency effect true believers ( EH - Thanks, Heavens, for all the things you learn in school! ). We have an overwhelming bias for the latter, which is why a destiny - a trajectory, in general- becomes somewhat predictable. For at least a quarter century we have had a clear thick description of an " ending" hence, to those critics who say we are more concerned with how to dot the I's and cross the T' s than the substance of all things deep, we admit: of course, we are! Why bother, after all? When you are redundant/ repetitive in substance you are simply recurrent, enhancing the validity and reliability, i.e., adding to scholarship. The impact is thus limited to a minority of thinkalikes. When you are repetitive in appearance, you commit a universal crime of decorum, infinitely more vexing and noticeable than any fallacy of substance. Hence, the overpowering tendency to give our best to current trends, masks, and appearances.
Again, when we talk about the ending of a (hi)story, this is what we tacitly imply - in our watercooler words and ways, of course - even if we dress it up more casually, or outdoorsy:
“ The end of history will be a very sad time....” (Go to Fukuyama, The End of History)
No comments:
Post a Comment