Maybe my English teacher had it right

I think all of us have been frustrated at some point in time by trying to understand what someone else has written, especially interpreting a poem in school. Let’s look in on Susie’s experience with this at college as she shares her frustration over the phone with her mom.

- Phone rings    -




Mom: Hello
Susie: Hi Mom
Mom: Oh hi Susie, I’m so glad you called. Everything OK?
Susie: Yeah, everything’s good. Well, almost everything.

Mom: What’s wrong?
Susie: I’m kinda struggling in English literature this semester.
Mom: Really? I thought you liked literature?
Susie: Oh, I do, Mom. It’s just this professor, he makes poetry so frustrating.

Mom: Oh, poetry, I always had trouble understanding what a poem meant. They always seemed so abstract and interpretations so arbitrary.
Susie: Yeah, that’s my problem, too. He gives us these poems and asks us to interpret what we think the poet’s theme is. I feel like I have a good logical explanation and he says, nope, that’s not what the poet is trying to tell us. But, he doesn’t explain why my view isn’t true.

Mom: I remember being frustrated at that too. My professor would emphasize that the truth of the poem is what the poet has chosen to mean by what he or she writes. It really didn’t matter how good of an argument I could give for why it could mean something else.
Susie: Yes, I am not sure why literature is different from my other courses.

Mom: What do you mean?
Susie: Well, in economics we develop rational arguments for what is true. The right answer seems to depend on how well we can make a logical defense for what we believe. The same thing holds for Philosophy. In all of my subjects, but literature experts have developed competing arguments for what is true about something. AND, as long as we have a good explanation for what we believe to be true, we can claim to be right too.

Mom: Yeah, I agree, it seems that when we call something science, truth about an object is determined by inferences we can make about the object by collecting data. But, in other areas of knowledge, truth is determined by what the person who originated the object says is true.
Susie: Having different ways to determine truth is so confusing. With science truth seems relative and depends on the validity of arguments people can make about the object. In science, how much knowledge about an object we can gather is what is important.  But then, with literature, truth seems to be absolute and depends on what the author says is true. In this case, how smart we are or how much data we gather isn’t the issue. Its all about getting to know what the author says that is important. I guess truth is just “different strokes for different folks.” (a little laugh)

Mom:  Yes, Susie, I see why you are a bit frustrated. It seems that the best thing to do is just accept how science and literature differ with regards to truth and kind of “go along to get along”, as they say. Makes life easier that way.
Susie: I guess it is easier, but two ways to find truth is a bit unsettling for a young person like me who wants to be able to find truth so I can live the best life possible.

Mom: Yeah, I can see that. (thoughtful hesitation) This conversation reminds me of something I learned in a course called b4Worldview. One of the major points of this course was the discussion of the two different core assumptions about truth. It was so interesting at the time, but I had let the point about truth kind of slip into the background. Maybe it can help you sort this out.
Susie: That would be nice mom, what did it say about truth?

Mom: Let’s see if I can get this straight. I know it talked a lot about relative and absolute truth, kind of like we did. Then it said something so profound that relates to what we were discussing.
Susie: Yeah, what was that?
Mom: The speaker said that there are two basic beliefs about truth that people hold dear. In fact, these beliefs are called core assumptions, which means they are beliefs a person has that they never question, but use to make sense of everything else.
Susie: Core assumptions? cool idea. What were the two core assumptions about truth?

 Mom: They were like what we were talking about. One core assumption is that truth about an object is determined by what an observer can conclude about the object. This is like science. The other core assumption is that the truth about an object is determined by what the originator of the object says about it. This is like poems or stories, its more about the author.
Susie: That’s interesting. This seems like it suggests that if a person has the first core assumption, then they would see truth as relative, there can be many views of truth. If they have the second core assumption, then truth is absolute and there is only one view of what is true.

Mom: Yes, that seems right. The b4Worldview course didn’t use literature as the example of the second core assumption, but author’s are originators of objects in literature. The course emphasized architects of buildings as the source of truth about the buildings. Although you can observe a building and infer qualities about the building, the truth is best and maybe only known by asking the architect, especially if there are qualities of the building that cannot be observed.
Susie: Objects have qualities we cannot observe?
Mom: Oh, yes, things like the purpose of the building.
Susie: Wow, mom, I never thought of truth that way. Everybody seems to think science is the best way to know what is true, BUT I can see this second core assumption about truth is powerful. The idea that truth is what the originator says is not very common at my university.

Mom: No, I agree, in fact most people hold tight to the first core assumption about truth and because its a core assumption, they never really question that they trust what they and other observers say about an object more than they trust what the originator says.
Susie: I can see that, mom. How do we know which core assumption is best?

Mom: That’s what was interesting about b4Worldview. The speaker emphasized that core assumptions are beliefs we do not prove. BUT, here is what stuck with me. The instructor told us that the original meaning of the word “truth” was “the disclosure of actual qualities of an object.” It was very transforming for me to see that truth is really about disclosure.
Susie: That sounds like core assumption two. For some quality of an object to be disclosed, it is probably not observed.

Mom: Yeah, that’s what was so life changing for me, because I was so used to trusting science for truth and not the author of the story, or architect of the building or the originator of the object.
Susie: So, instead of being frustrated by how my professor pushes me to see truth about a poem by seeing what is revealed to me by the poet, I should thank him for pushing me toward core assumption two about truth?

Mom: Yeah, Susie, this has been a really good chat and an important life lesson .... Seen any good movies lately?