Retrieved from: http://www.cynicalreflections.net/2011/12/jeremy-clarkson-ironic-or-just-prat.html
Please feel free to give any examples that might enlight our discussion on that matter.
miércoles, 30 de enero de 2019
A brief historical overview of the theme of truth: Parrhesia.
Please feel free to give any examples that might enlight our discussion on that matter.
Suscribirse a:
Comentarios de la entrada (Atom)
Foucault leave us a question on the second part of the text (parrhesia and truth) to compare the "parrhesia" of the ancient greek with the concept of evidence.
ResponderBorrarwhat i understand from parrhesia is that it comes more from the moral, and if you have a good moral or moral qualities you should know the truth. For the evidence is like you should have a knowledge about what you are goin to afirm and what you think is the truth. so they are different's way's to see the truth. that's why parrhesia, i think, has lost in a certain way his uses from the modern time. Because we always try to find the truth with a source resource that can certificate the truth.
the concept of parrhesia as the searching of truth and thereby the obligation of expressing it even with a death risk.
ResponderBorrarI think that parrhesia is like a gossip because it adapts to some types of language in which people express themselves, but nevertheless, it emphasizes the subjective aspect of a speaker in what other people think, the interesting part that but my attention was in the text of the parrhesia and the truth, where a perrogative is distinguished and the constitution in which people are opposed in a verbal way to the discussion between them without resorting to this rhetoric, finally this text includes mentions to many historians in order to give people a meaning to what parrhesia is constituted and from which time it looks
I found very difficult to give an actual example of parrhesia now days, the only thing I can think of is something we already discussed in class.
ResponderBorrarFor example when you are in a construction you have to use way to much parrhesia if you want everything to be in order and anything illegal. But if we came to this, as we talk in class this is not parrhesia because is a duty, something moral.
Can we say what we actually think? or do we stay in silence in fear of power?
ResponderBorrarWe can see Parrhesia as the resistance to political power. According to this everyone has the right to be against the president or any leader, to say whatever one wants and be heard, so is it possible to practice real "Parrhesia"? Women's free speech was not common before and nowadays is not respected enough. Take for example the case of Cyntoia Brown in Tennessee, who was sentenced to life in prision. The judge didn't care about the fact she was 16 years old when a man 30 years older used her like a sexual slave. Or the case of "Las damas de blanco”, Cuban movement fighting for the democratic activists who are in prision. Neither the activists nor the women have been able to defeat the dictator.
Here in Colombia, we can’t talk about football with anyone without fear that someone will stab you right outside the Atanasio Girardot, just for wearing another team's shirt. We can’t talk about religion, because if you’re Christian, then extreme Catholics will fight you even if you believe in the same loving God. You cannot talk about politics either. Even if you are a reporter, have your own television show and the power to say what the people cannot, someone will threaten you.
Do you feel free? Well, the criminals who think they own the neighborhood and make invisible borders carrying their big weapons, those men who have taken over the country and stolen money, those groups that wear camouflage and kill young innocents that were dreaming of being heroes, those people who ride motorcycles stealing and killing people who fought to make others happy, those who keep silent when they see children dying of hunger, those men and women who rape and murder children, those guilty of murdering social leaders and those engineers who allowed the bad construction of buildings just to save money, letting it collapse on innocent people, trust me, they’ll make you close your mouth.
As we've seen in class the concept of parrhesia comes imbued with speaking one's own mind, without fear of whatever consequences it may bring. Unfortunately, as some classmates have stated previously, to practice parrhesia in Colombia is possibe at the cost of threats, retaliation (be it physical or verbal), and/or potential enemies.
ResponderBorrarSuch was the case of colombian cartoonist Matador that had received death threats coming from Uribe backers, that he had to lay off social media for a short amount of time. While he mostly uses his cartoons as a way of reflecting on the reality of issues happening in Colombia I believe that is his own way of becoming the parrhesiastes. Although fortunately he wasn't physically harmed it's a clear example of how risky it can be to practice parrhesia here in Colombia.
Este comentario ha sido eliminado por el autor.
ResponderBorrarToday parrhesia is related to us, with actions throughout our lives. Telling the truth is not an imposition or submission, on the other hand, it is the freedom to choose a form of existence where you make your own manifestation of the truth.
ResponderBorrarParrhesía can be practiced by all, it only depends on who is the speaker and the audience. For example, when there is a speaker in an auditorium full of people who have a different thought, parrhesia is put into practice, since the speaker is part of the minority and in a certain way his speech is true, those people will not consider it as truth. This example is seen nowadays in the political field, when there are presidential elections and the candidate arrives at a place where he is not accepted.
The real truth can be built since we are little and it depends on the people who educate us. Every day we are immersed in different situations which put us to the test on the value of truth. To practice parrhesia in this case we must leave aside the different reactions or opinions that other people may have. So I wonder ... is it important to tell the truth affecting others ?, I think that regardless of the culture we should all have a certain touch for the other, since that is what coexistence is about. Many times when you talk to the truth without putting on makeup you can hurt the feelings of others and in my concept that is something that should be avoided. With this I do not mean that we should be evasive, on the other hand, let's always speak with the truth. Although the practice of parrhesia can be achieved today, I would add the possibility of telling the truth to others in a more friendly way.
I have noticed that in Colombia, there are not many people who practice real parrhesia. For example, in my environment there are two people who practice parrhesia and many times when they speak directly with the truth without any kind of taboos, they are not well seen by others regardless of whether they are right or not.
In conclusion I would say that today it is possible to use parrhesia in many areas, such as politics, sports, arts, etc. It depends more on who speaks and his personality.
Este comentario ha sido eliminado por el autor.
ResponderBorrarin our daily life we have small acts of parrhesia for example:
ResponderBorrar-Let´s imagine you saw another team of classmates does a fine job in their last project they present it and at first the professor like it and put them a great grade later on the professor out of nowhere tell them that they where making fun of him and that they no longer will get that grade but instead a very lower one they tried to talk to their teacher but he won´t give them any reasons or explanations they tried to do something but then the professor threat them that if they do something else they will get a 0 an fail the subject. you know the truth and know that your classmates did a fine job and that they did not in any way tried to offend him. you know that you can get in trouble with your professor but you know what´s fair and you decide to go to the professor superior and tell them what happens getting your classmates a fair chance at their project.
Reality, being a perception given by our senses, shows us the world as it is, the definition of truth is not a definition in itself, it is simply what we perceive, and it is not something determined by language, because the language itself is a limitation of reality itself, the language seeks to define it as something in itself, when reality is not something defined. We seek to name things because by naming them we access them easier, but language itself is only the way in which we can name reality in a society, but things are not the name we give them. things are what they are without a limitation.
ResponderBorrarThere is no absolute truth because each human being has a subjective reality, and no one has a way of seeing the world in the same way, we only perceive what we interpret of the environment, that makes our perception hypothesize about the environment. But then if all people perceive the world differently, how is reality in its purest essence? How is reality not determined under many subjective perceptions? What is really out there?
Nobody can access that, and that is exactly what the truth would be. The truth in its purest essence will never be something that we can access because we only access it through the interpretations we make of it.
https://cmapscloud.ihmc.us:443/rid=1TB21R3MP-2D1S24V-6TB5CW
ResponderBorrarMade by:
Alejandra García
Vanessa Yepes
Nowadays, we live in a society that’s always “seeking for the truth”. Every day we see more people, more movements promising to be a voice for those who don’t have one, promising to go against the system aiming for the truth to come out of the dark to see the light, like in Plato’s cave. No censorship, no decorations, just the truth and nothing but the truth.
ResponderBorrarMany would say that this is how the so called “Social Justice Warriors” are born. Those people who, following Foucault’s postulates on Parrhesia, know that it’s their duty to express their truths, those truths they truly believe in. They know it comes with a risk, they know they’ll be criticized, they know they’re fighting against people that are above them, but they still just share and tell their truths with no fear.
But let’s be honest. Most of us are no social justice warriors. That’s not the reality of the majority. Yes. We do sometimes go out with the mass, marching for what we believe in…. But would we really do it if we were alone? Or do we do it because we know we’re just part of the mass?
Let’s just look at our context here, in Colombia. A country with a culture that raised us telling us that “if you don’t have anything good or pretty to say, then don’t say anything at all”. And sometimes, the truth is ugly, the truth is hurtful, the truth is hard to handle.
The practice of Parrhesia is hard. And that’s exactly what Foucault was talking about on his text. There are of course times when we do feel like it’s our duty to speak our truths, even when we understand the risk. We can practice real parrhesia, but I don’t think it happens every day, or even often at all.
Parrhesia from my seen point is tell the truth without fear to repercutions, treating to put your truth like an absolute truth, to achieve this you have to be convinced of what you say and also have proof of it, it's like when a teacher teaches children about the sense of taste; At our age we know that what he teaches "is true", but for a 3-year-old child it may not be true, for me this is parrhesia, an absolute truth that can be transmitted to others in one way or another.
ResponderBorrarPlease have a look at my Cmap:
ResponderBorrarCmap-1
https://cmapscloud.ihmc.us:443/rid=1T9P11J5H-GFP5QB-5C124R
Didier Castro
Cristian Ramos
My belief is that in our actual environment is complicated to practice parrhesia. Today we live concerned about how everything looks like and everyone is extremely cautios about what they say and how they say it. We have grown in a society wich prefers lies rather than truth as it is. Everything now looks nicer and better with this "make up" upon it. That is how we live today, giving credit to what social media communicates and we dont even realize how everything is just a mediatic lie today. So, how can we think abaout practicing real truth if we dont even live truthfully lives? I think, we can say the truth about something, but are we really saying it since we feel the duty to do so? or before telling the truth we think de pros and cons of it, and our "duty" would depend on how it would affect or benefit us and our appearences.
ResponderBorrarNowadays what only matters to society is what people think, you just can not be yourself people have forgot the meaning of free expression because they are too worried about opinions to fit in and thats why they have to put make up on in truth i mean you cant just spell it society teach you how to fit in and one of those recommendations is "you have to say what people want to hear" but a lot of times what is truth is not what you want to hear, so now the question is, where is our duty of saying things just the way they are? we dont need to fix anything we dont need to fit in what we need is more people to speak out no matter what.
ResponderBorrarI think that you can always say what you have in your mind, if you believe that this is true for you, no matter what the other people think you need to believe in yourself, but in the other hand i think that is a little dificult say the truth to the people that we love because we care about their feelings, and maybe that could be a reason why we aren't always using parrhesia.
ResponderBorrarI think parrhesia is "Say the truth you think, it does not matter if it affects others or not".
ResponderBorrarAccording to the text, we all have an absolute truth and that is the only thing that matters, No matter what others think, that's just what you think. Usually people think a lot about what to say by how others see it, but this does not apply to people who really apply parrhesia, they don't care if for u what they say is truth or not, they are only saying their truth and that's all.
As we saw in the reading, parrhesia is speaking the truth in the face of a risk. In today's polarized world, especially in the West with the surge of right-wing populism, parrhesia seems more necessary than ever. In these societies, it is very possible to practice parrhesia because many opinions are controversial, and one will be slated for defending them. In the U.S., if you are a Democrat, many Republicans will categorically disregard your opinion, and vice versa. This is even the case if you have good, factually substantiated arguments. However, in such a context, it is especially important to practice parrhesia, as even though you might get a hard time voicing your truth, you might have given the interlocutor some food for thought. This is one way to practice parrhesia nowadays. Another big way to practice parrhesia in recent times has been to be a whistleblower. People like Snowden or Assange practiced the ultimate parrhesia of modern times by letting the people know the truth, even though this entailed great risks to them.
ResponderBorrar