Essay due 12pm tuesday 1-2 pages

Alon Suberi Dr.Smyth

Period 10

Reality; Truth or Perspective?

How can a person determine that the reality they experience is the same reality as the neighbor next-door? To clarify, let’s make the assumption that in some other place in the universe, there is a planet where people are all born color blind. Grass is red, fire is green, and to them this seems completely natural. If one of these people are to come to Earth, they will argue with everyone that the grass of the front lawn is red and ponder as to how these people be can be so certain that grass is green when to him is appears red. No one can prove to this person that the grass is truthfully green nor can this person prove the opposite because of one simple fact, you cannot define a color without using the actual color that it seems to be. Or does this only hold true in our reality? To us defining a color is impossible without using an object that has that specific pigment, but what if in another reality one can define a color with words or some other form of communication? Reality at this point in time, seems to be impossible to define without using what is generally considered to be reality by that person, just defining what a color is, remains nonviable. Actuality is almost an opinion people form as they experience life for themselves, which is further proven by Morpheus when he gives Neo a reality ultimatum and tells him, “You take the blue pill, the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe.” Morpheus makes it very clear that the truth is only what one believes it to be, just like one could believe chocolate is the best flavor of ice cream or dogs are superior to cats. Most importantly, this raises an essential question, is reality just a set of facts and ideas that people tend to follow? Or, is it just a matter of belief?

Plato makes a great argument as to how reality differs from person to person in “The Allegory of the Cave”. In Socrates’ conversation with Glaucon, Socrates asks (paragraph 22), “He will require to grow accustomed to the sight of the upper world. And first he will see the shadows best, next the reflections of men and other objects in the water, and then the objects themselves; then he will gaze upon the light of the moon and the stars and the spangled heaven; and he will see the sky and the stars by night better than the sun or the light of the sun by day? This rhetorical question supports the idea that in Plato’s text, there are 3 different realties all in very close proximities. First, is the most palpable, the men imprisoned in a cave and can see nothing but obscurities and a dim fire that helps project them. In their opinion shadows and their fellow inmates around them are all that is real. The next, is the truth that the general public believe reality to be. The third and final reality in this circumstance, is the man who is let free from the cave, who can point out starts at night to the public that they cannot see simply because the man is has been accustom to low lighting for such an extensive period of time. His whole perception of the truth differs from the average person as he is blinded by the sun, yet has enhanced vision in the night. It may seem obvious to an ordinary person that the newly released prisoner would prefer to exist outside of the cave, however, this may not seem as clear at second glance. This inmate received food and water all at the expense of someone else and they did not have to worry about conforming to their society because their society was so small that the reality they believed in were all very similar. Now that he has been exposed to another world, he must find an alternative way to feed and clothe himself. He must conform to a new reality that is far different from the one he is used to. The life in the cave may have suited him better, and for that specific reason he may want to believe that his relinquishment was a nightmare and that soon he will wake up in the reality that he believes to be the truth. Cypher, for example, seemed to much rather have stayed in The Matrix because the reality he had known was difficult for him to cope with and he would have rather stayed in the cave, like in the hypothetical circumstance of the man who had difficulty feeding himself outside of his dimmed world. In attempt to return to The Matrix system Cypher has a conversation with Agent Smith and tells him [Referring to the conditions he will want when he returns to The Matrix], “I don’t want to remember nothing, nothing, you understand? And I want to be rich, you know, someone important, like an actor.” In Cypher’s opinion, an extravagant life is a great escape from the horrifying reality outside of The Matrix. He would rather change trade his reality for one that will make his life easier. Agent Smith believes the reality he is trapped in is a dreadful, rotten place to be. When attempting to break Morpheus’ mind to acquire the key codes to Zion he states, “I’m going to be honest with you. I hate this place, this zoo, this prison, this reality, whatever you want to call it. I can’t stand it any longer. It’s the smell, if there is such a thing. I feel saturated by it. I can taste your stink, and every time I do I fear that I have somehow been infected by it. It’s repulsive, isn’t it? I must get out of here. I must get free, and this mind is the key, my key!” Agent Smith clearly cannot stand living inside The Matrix and because he knows there is a reality other than his own, he is determined to be there, almost as if his reality is based on where he would rather be. This proves reality is simply not things as one see’s them, because people seem to have the tendency to see things differently as the cave prisoner does from the rest of society. Very clearly, reality is based on a matter of opinion, and there are many conflicting positions as to what their reality is simply because it suits them more comfortably.

Since reality has been established to have absolutely no meaning, how does one cope with their reality in life recognizing the fact that actuality is simply based on opinion and convenience? Pratt’s “Art of the Contact Zone” gives some guidance as to how cope with people’s alternate views on reality and how that guides people to find what their true reality is. Pratt describes what the ultimate method for people to become knowledgeable is, and it is much simpler than one would think. Pratt claims (paragraph 36-37), “The very nature of the course [referring to her son’s course] put ideas and identities on the line. All the students in the class had the experience, for example, of hearing their culture discussed and objectified in ways that horrified them; all the students saw their roots traced back to legacies of both glory and shame; all the students experienced face-to-face the ignorance and incomprehension, and occasionally the hostility, of others. In the absence of community values and the hope of synthesis, it was easy to forget the positives; the fact, for instance, that kinds of marginalization once taken for granted were gone. Virtually every student was having the experience of seeing the world described with him or her in it. Along with rage, incomprehension, and pain there were exhilarating moments of wonder and revelation, mutual understanding, and new wisdom-- the joys of the contact zone. The sufferings and revelations were, at different moments to be sure, experienced by every student. No one was excluded, and no one was safe. The fact that no one was safe made all of us involved in the course appreciate the importance of what we came to call “safe houses.” We used the term to refer to social and intellectual spaces where groups can constitute themselves as horizontal, homogeneous, sovereign communities with high degrees of trust, shared understandings, temporary protection from legacies of oppression. This is why, as we realized, multicultural curricula should not seek to replace ethnic or women’s studies, for example. Where there are legacies of subordination, groups need places for healing and mutual recognition, safe houses in which to construct shared understandings, knowledges, claims on the world that they can then bring into the contact zone.” Pratt is telling the reader that the best way to learn is by questioning every little detail a person believes in, even if it offends them, because once you have full vision of what each person’s view of reality is, one can create their own opinion (reality). Learning by this method also is a great way to change literacies when needed and conform to society in order to avoid becoming an outcast of a specific society, for example a book club, or to people one is trying to impress. With this method, one can change realities more authentically to make life easier for them learn much faster as opposed to the conventional learning environment, which is leaning towards the Freire’s “The Banking Concept of Education” where (paragraph 2), “The teacher talks about reality as if it were motionless, static, compartmentalized, and predictable. Or else he expounds on a topic completely alien to the existential experience of the students. His task is to fill the students with the contents of his narration- contents which are detached from reality, disconnected from the totality endangered them and could give them significance. Words are emptied into the concreteness and become a hollow, alienated, and alienating verbosity.” If education wants students to develop their own opinion, would it not be obvious that a student must see all views of the subject rather than to tint views with an unbiased assessment, and question it over and over in order to find clarity, or perhaps a fault in the ideology? Forming one’s reality is very important but it cannot be accomplished properly if scholars cannot see all views.

In today’s world, it is unacceptable to challenge a person, or the values that they stand for because every issue has become too sensitive. The general public is too worried about who is offending their personal views or their reality rather than embrace questioning and criticism in order to better understand what they stand for as well as what other people believe. By questioning what a person believes in with critical thinking, people will learn that many aspects of their reality may need to be rebuffed or perhaps dropped altogether. Because these people are too focus on staying in groups where everyone has the same views, people become stuck in their own reality. June Jordan, for example, helped translate many texts into different languages and expresses the difficulty of translating entire texts into different languages. She was praised for her work that is still studied until this day. Imagine if the whole planet decided to step out of their cocoon just to experience the life of someone else. People will receive a new understanding as to what their reality is and what they can take from other people’s opinions in order to better their life. Every person should consider what reality they are in and if they enjoy it or if they would rather change realities in order to better their well-being. Finally, it may be concluded that reality is a simple a matter of opinion and perspective rather than a set of laid out rules someone has set out because after all, that is their reality and not someone else’s.

References

Freire, Paolo. "The "Banking" Concept of Education." (n.d.): n. pag. Web.

Plato. "The Allegory of the Cave." N.p., n.d. Web.

Pratt, Mary L. "Arts of the Contact Zone." (n.d.): n. pag. Web.

The Matrix. Dir. Lily Wachkowski and Lana Wachkowski. Perf. Keanu Reeves. N.p., n.d. Web.