we were experiencing a fading of thereal, a pervasive derealization he saw asintimately linked to technology and in particularto technologies of image reproduction likecinema and television, which offer powerful-yet-bogus impressions of reality in the absence ofreality itself.
This reminds me of the documentary covering a homicide that AI-generated a family photo of the victim smiling
And unlike the writtenword, it partakes of an indexical bond to the real,offering a mediated encounter with physicalreality in which a heightened attunement to theactuality of our shared world becomes possible
I think this is saying documentaries make community feel realer or more existent/interactive
empiricism
a view that knowledge can only come from empirical evidence and experience
Proclaiming the unreality ofthe present lifts the heavy burdens of gravity,belief, and action, effecting a great levelingwhereby all statements float by, cloaked indoubt.
It's a cop-out because it pretends to be a meaningful commentary and shirks responsibility. If I can sum everything up to "it's bad," I can dust my hands off and be done for the day without looking at it or myself any further. (Action doesn't specifically have to be overt or political action)
In assertingthe indiscernibility of fact and fiction, thepanicked statement that reality has collapsed attimes accomplishes little but furthering thecollapse of reality.
Criticism/reflection without action is completely unhelpful or even destructive
It takes will and effort, and ifyou are like me, some days you won't be able to do it, or you just flat outwon't want to
This idea reminds me of the quote (from somewhere) "do not attribute to malice what you can attribute to ignorance," giving people the benefit of the doubt when they fall short of what you expect them to do
for if I can say, 'Not a real pig, butlike a pig', I don't have to tamper with the meaning of'pig' itself.
'real' can exclude other definitions (mentioned earlier) and meaning itself
We have not their excuse for getting confused on this admittedlyconfusing topic.
This author has a fun way of writing
We can perfectly well say ofsomething that it is pink without knowing, without anyreference to, what it is. But not so with 'real'
This was neat because it finally tied back to the initial 'is real a normal word or not' after going through a bunch of examples where 'real' is conditional
Does its real shape change whenever it moves?
Reality depends on observation and intuition--picking up on the learned pattern (like between cats and crickets) and the conditions/context when you observe something
Itis often also a term of blame or limitation, in these senses: (a) that what isdescribed or represented is seen only superficially, in terms of its outwardappearance rather than its inner reality;
This is also really interesting because it reminds me of the rule "show, not tell." Even though you can describe something literally (It exploded), you can leave out details that are just as important in describing reality (It burst into flames).
But this is the kindof use which was eventually distinguished from realism and which indeedallowed a contrast between realism and other words in this complex, as inSwinburne’s contrast of ‘prosaic realism’ and ‘poetic reality’ (188
I think it's interesting how one definition of realism (Sense 3) describes "knowing" and or viewing things with a different lens of truth than other observers vs. Sense 4 of seeing things how they actually are (in real life). I can see the difference in Sense 3 and 4 as "what should be (morally/spiritually)" and "what is. I'm using truth not as something opposite to false but an overarching descriptor of beyond logic.