purple motes

A good story does not end a conflict of ideas. A conflict of ideas is more likely to end when tedium, absurdity dessicated of humor, or irrelevance obscures enough of the contending ideas. Accumulation of relevant facts and development of reasoning ability can help lead to this end.

Only bad story-tellers could possibly believe in stories with nice, conflict-ending closings. Do you believe this story:

As the information age deepens, a globe–circling realm of the mind is being created — the “noosphere” that Pierre Teilhard de Chardin identified 80 years ago. ...
What may turn out to matter for all parties — the advocates and their audiences and adversaries — is the “story” being told, implicitly or explicitly. Realpolitik is typically about whose military or economy wins. Noöpolitik may ultimately be about whose story wins. ...
This poses quite a challenge for information strategy, a concept that calls for knowing the enemy, shaping public consciousness, and crafting persuasive messages for friend and foe alike. It is about getting the contents of those messages right, while finding the best conduits. It is about deploying inviting, meaningful narratives to win the battle of the story.[Ronfeldt and Arquilla (2007)]

If you believe this, what advice would you give to Mark Cuban when asked why he allowed a famous director freedom to produce Redacted? If you believe this, what advice would you give to Chris Anderson, who's worried about how it might look to be disseminating knowledge to everyone, including Iranians, about how to build and control drones (aerial drones, not those other drones). Just read the comments to those linked posts, and you'll find all kinds of story possibilities. The most influential communication may not be a story at all, like Mark Cuban's final line: "And to anyone who has ever questioned my patriotism or love for this country, f**k you." [redacted in honor of FCC indecency regulations]

While concern for narrative probably peaked as an academic fashion in the early 1990s, discussion of narrative still carries an air of sophistication. This air of sophistication has helped to sustain places like Durham in Wonderland. It can lead to pathetic bigotry devoid of good reasoning and concern for truth. Ponder this dumbfounding spectacle of story-warriors. While what Stuart Taylor and K.C. Johnson have done requires brains and courage, their example offers a much more auspicious possibility for the future of the world.

Reference:

Ronfeldt, David and John Arquilla (2007), The promise of noöpolitik, First Monday, v. 12, n. 8 (August).

Offer Comments

Your son is charged with first-degree rape, first-degree sexual offense, and first-degree kidnapping. Leading national newspapers report these charges on their front pages, along sensational accounts of the allegations, false statements, grossly slanted reporting, and your son's photograph.

You know that there is no credible evidence to support the charges. Anyone who seriously examined the evidence could recognize that the charges have no credible support. More than a year later, after a 90-day review of the evidence, the Attorney General will declare: "there was no credible evidence to support the allegation that the crimes occurred."

But right now, hate-filled persons are assembling around a large banner screaming "castrate." "Wanted" criminal posters are going up on the campus of your son's university. Professors at your son's university are condemning him and his friends. The university suspends your son because of the charges.

You see the District Attorney engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice. The District Attorney fails to disclose exculpatory evidence. The District Attorney makes false statements to the court, to defense attorneys, and to the State Bar. The District Attorney makes extrajudicial media statements that materially prejudice the proceeding and heighten public condemnation of your son.

Does anyone care? They say, "Let the criminal justice system run its course." The course of the criminal justice system is unjustly causing your son enormous damage. It's a travesty of justice, a fiasco. Meanwhile, crime profs spotlight each other on a blog (that's said to build traffic). Ferocious blog-critics of traditional media prefer not to consider the performance of the traditional media in this case. Perhaps they're afraid, and they have common sense for career advancement. Far too few persons in positions of power and influence act to help stop this injustice.

Your son is steadfast in the truth in his suffering. He is witness to the best of what human beings can be. He is, finally, exonerated. You might have easily missed news of this development.

Thank you, with a thank you as wide as the sky, for fathers who raise sons like David Evans.

Offer Comments

In an important statement, one of Duke's famous alumni has clarified details regarding the recent controversy. Complete video coverage below.

Click To Play

Offer Comments