Welcome everyone to the Liberal Latte's new blog, Between the Lines and Realities!
This is a place for me to share my thoughts and views on a myriad of issues, primarily political, social and philosophical. However, more importantly, this is a place for you to make a comment and debate the issues. As the title suggests, the blog puts emphasis on how and what the media tell us and their lens sometimes can distort reality (if such thing as reality exists). But, not only this blog examines the media-related issues, the blog itself is new media; the Internet has a potential to become a real 'public sphere', where people can discuss their views freely, and get their opinions heard, without economic or political constraints. The Blogsphere has been gradually diminishing the power of corporate-owned media; without YouTube the word 'macaca' wouldn't have entered the political dictionary and the Democrats might not have regained the control of the Senate last year. I see a light of hope in the strength and potential of this new media technology, even in the world dominated by George W. Bush and Rupert Murdoch.
Reality is, for us humans, (mostly, if not always) perception. Each individual perceives matters differently. Therefore, there are multiple realities, and mutual communication and interaction with people with different backgrounds and realities can enrich the way we think. I hope this blog grows to be a public sphere where we can read between the lines, and go on a journey to find ways to make the world a better place to live in together, through lively and creative discussions between realities. My views have been incredibly widened by brilliant blogs and discussions in the blogs; it is my dream to make this place provide an opportunity for you to broaden your world, and my world. And I can never, absolutely never accomplish this goal without your support and comment!
Lastly, if you want to contact me, please leave a comment on this post. (Or if you know me just email me!)
5 comments:
I could say everything is perception, and nothing is reality.
But I choose to put as much faith in the world being round, the sun being a star and the northern hemisphere having some form of life (intelligent or otherwise) as I do in the existent of a ominiscient, omnipotent and ominipresent God.
To believe anything is an act of blind faith, but I choose to believe.
I don't know if literally everything is perception; the fact my mind is thinking is not perception, and in my understanding that's what Descartes meant by "I think therefore I am". But it is true that most things are perception.
However, to believe something with evidences is not really an act of 'blind' faith. I believe that the northern hemisphere have a highly intelligent form of life because I think I met them myself, and the sun is a star not a planet, from the observations that the sun shares characteristics of a star, not a planet. The faith that the northern hemisphere has a form of life is more credible than the faith the Venus has a form of life. To believe something with empirical evidences is a way to minimise uncertainty surrounding the perception, nonetheless it is still perception.
Hey Atsushi,
brilliant that you've started up a blog. Can't wait to see what more your liberal hot-pot mind (it's a compliment!) can cook up, especially in these testing times. Loved your Hillary article, keep up the good work!
LL, I agree that everything is indeed perception. "Truth" is defined by the generation. Astrology used to be an accepted "truth" and is now an accepted "false". It all comes down to Foucault's theory of the "expert" - certain individuals are seen as knowing truth by different people at different times... like Pat Robertson or Paul Holmes.
What people perceive as "Truth" is determined by the generation or experts, Truth itself is not defined by these. Astrology was accepted as Truth but has never been True, no matter what the experts at that time said...
Post a Comment