I was going to post this on the Gaza thread (which i hadn't even read until today), you and @Foghorn might consider exploring the many expressions of violence and conflict, for purposes of educating the conflict mongers and the trolls. I don't think these halfwits are aware of the subtleties that can be explored and observed, in such a topic. Just a suggestion.

@skyblack Cheers for that suggestion!
The irony is that a lot of the posters on that wild thread are probably well read in novels,plus they have life experience of conflict,which is the ultimate.
The media/ruling class ideologies are religiously held to by many posters for fear of actually having to think for themselves.
Fear is the mind warper!

exploring the many expressions of violence and conflict, — skyblack

One had said elsewhere, it's the inner reflecting as the outer. Whether it's Gaza or any other conflict zones in the world. Whether it's in one's life, in one's home, or in society. The outer always mirrors the inner. It's such a simple clear logical observation...

I think that novels and philosophy are different forms of expression of ideas about truth. Some people prefer reading novels and some prefer philosophy. I enjoy reading both, and would like to write a novel really.I think that novels give scope for saying things which cannot be explored in prose. It is possible to express ideas symbolically.Novels and philosophy, as well as other forms of writing, are different forms of expression. Some writers experimented in both: Sartre, Camus and Iris Murdoch.

:up:

@Jack Cummins Compare sartres fiction to his academic work. Academia is many times dry and pedantic. Too abstract.
Continental philosophy at least is more descriptive and more social commentary. A lot of analytical philosophy is philosophy about philosophy.
Life can't be abstracted!

Life can't be abstracted! — Mystic

+1

How? Let's say I have a good argument about free will - a good argument that implies free will is compatible with determinism. I should write a novel about it?? Would I just crowbar a scene in where one character gives another a 2 hour talk on it?

"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times..." That's a contradiction Dickens. Which is it?!?

I think that it would be possible to write a very good novel about free will, because you could look at the question of choice from different points of view. It could involve juxtaposing points of view, especially the first and third person, and the idea of the omniscient narrator. I think that it is surprising how much scope novel writing gives.

I have always found the novel to be a far better expression of truth and wisdom than academic philosophy and science. — Mystic

I became disillusioned by novels at a relatively early age.I found myself noticing that the author was applying an implicit psychological understanding of others to the narrative structure and characters , and I couldn’t help but compare their insights to those of various psychological theorists. The psychological insights of the novelists always proved inferior. Dickens , for instance , is a Romantic moralist, and I think there are better ways of understanding people. I haven’t yet come across a novel that has caught up to the leading edge of philosophical and psychological thinking.

I feel that you are missing out on the aesthetics of Dickens, and probably many other writers, if you prefer the dry writing of some of the psychological theorists. Of course, it all comes down to subjective preference.

I did English literature at 'A' level and being expected to read Henry James, Jane Austen and Chaucer just weren't what I needed at age 16. I had a soft spot for William Blake, and Shakespeare's 'King Lear', got me thinking about the nature of madness. But, I didn't read any fiction for a few years, and found my way back into it via cult fiction.

However, I think that what the novelists are able to do is go into so much more than interior monologues, and capture the sensory dimensions of existence, as well as the mythic aspects of life. But, it does all depend on one's state of mind, because if you can't find a book that is coming from the right place there is no point. It is a bit like suggesting that a classical music lover should try heavy metal or trip hop music.

it does all depend on one's state of mind, because if you can't find a book that is coming from the right place there is no point. It is a bit like suggesting that a classical music lover should try heavy metal or trip hop music. — Jack Cummins

But there are powerful , often subversive ideas embedded in a piece of music or a work of literature , and the particular bits of technique and style that belong to that expression are unified by a thematic meaning , which can also be called a worldview. No matter how many stylistic changes a writer like Dickens or Shelly or Kafka might experiment with, their work as a whole amounts to variations on a theme, that theme being a worldview , at the same time psychological and philosophical. Often, Our dislike for a form of music or literature isn’t just subjective preference , but an inability to assimilate the worldview expressed by that creation. It has seemed to me that the persons I know with only a passing interest in and acquaintance with pop music , and an intense interest in classical music invariably identify with a more traditionalistic worldview. When I listen to classical music from the 1700’s through the early 20th century I am inspired to think via older philosophical tropes , but this same music represses my ability to push the boundaries of my thinking.

I have always found the novel to be a far better expression of truth and wisdom than academic philosophy and science.
For instance dickens is far superior to Wittgenstein and any neuroscientists publications.
Do you agree or disagree?
What are your reasons? — Mystic

Not an unpopular view - perhaps because novels are easier to read? There are of course different types of novels.

I would ask how do you demonstrate that this is the case?

I find Dickens far more enjoyable that Wittgenstein (who I find unreadable) but that says more about my preferences than the texts at hand, surely? I've read around 9 Dickens novels and would be hard pressed to say what I have learned from them. Probably chiefly that optimism and cheerfulness can be transformative. Anything else? Depends on the reading, huh?

Novels, in my view, are generally like contrived case studies designed to prove a point about human nature, they are essentially emotional rather than rational. Discuss...

The novelist dramatically explores the folk psychology of characters who take for granted certain ideas or who have to question themselves due to circumstances. The philosopher, on the other hand, examines (explicates) ideas or questions themselves abstracted (generalized) from any psychologistic‐context, whereas the scientist mostly concerns herself with formulating testable explanatory models of some specific phenomena. Three faces of the coin of understanding (whys, whats & hows, respectively.)

yet often ones dislike for a form of music or literature isn’t just subjective preference , but an inability to assimilate the worldview expressed by that creation. It has seemed to me that the persons I know with only a passing interest in and acquaintance with pop music , and an intense interest in classical music invariably identify with a more traditionalistic worldview. When I listen to classical music from the 1700’s through the early 20th century I am inspired to think via older philosophical
tropes , but this same music represses my ability to push the boundaries of my thinking. — Joshs

I’m amazed that anyone of little acquaintance with pop/rock/rap music could be found nowadays. It plays everywhere you go, or if you stay home. It infiltrates all public and private spaces. More than that, it was the earliest musical passion of almost everyone still living.

By contrast, classical music is a fossil, something you have to go to a museum to experience. If we hear it now it is most likely the backdrop for some ostentatious car commercial, but there is no general fascination for it, as there is for the Queen and Royal Family.

When ones boundaries become the popular, the emergent; when what used to break boundaries becomes what sets them; when iconoclasm becomes a prejudice and ppl grow tired of breaking idols whose memory has become a fuzzy nebula; when we have forgotten what it was like to storm the Bastille, then the only plausible course to follow is to become a paleontologist and return to those old forgotten places. For they are the only ones remaining which might give us a counterpoise to what we are experiencing now...

...the last real fling America’s youth had with rock music that I remember was with Kurt Cobain and Nirvana. He really captivated the souls of the young with his dark lyrics and gravelly-voiced melodies. But when you try to penetrate that darkness to discover depth, all you find is post-existentialist nothingness and despair. I suppose that’s part of the reason he took himself out of the world.

I’m amazed that anyone of little acquaintance with pop/rock/rap music could be found nowadays. It plays everywhere you go, or if you stay home. — Todd Martin

I know hardly any music from the period of my youth 1970's and 1980's - I find it ugly. I too stick with 18th to early 20th century music for the most part. I find it more accurately reflects my experiences. I do listen to some jazz (Coltrane, Davis, Monk) and some Blues (Muddy Waters/John Lee Hooker/ Little Walter/Albert King).

@Bartricks Dostoevskys underground man part one is one of the greatest ever expositions on the free will debate. So much better and richer than the standard pedantry on philosophy forums.
Of course,free will is obvious,except to the confused.

@Joshs

I became disillusioned by novels at a relatively early age.I found myself noticing that the author was applying an implicit psychological understanding of others to the narrative structure and characters , and I couldn’t help but compare their insights to those of various psychological theorists. The psychological insights of the novelists always proved inferior. Dickens , for instance , is a Romantic moralist, and I think there are better ways of understanding people. I haven’t yet come across a novel that has caught up to the leading edge of philosophical and psychological thinking

I do agree that novelists express their own psychological understandings onto characters,why wouldn't they?! It's their "novel" understanding of the world. But the more astute novelists pick up insights consciously and unconsciously which correlate with actual human behaviour and motivations.
Amongst psychologists it's guys like James,freud,adler who also have great insights,but they are also exceptional writers,especially William James.
Even Nietzsche is great writer. Not your standard philosophical prose.
In contrast hegel,Kant,Wittgenstein,just turgid,with a few lines of oasis in a desert of jargon.

@Jack Cummins

However, I think that what the novelists are able to do is go into so much more than interior monologues, and capture the sensory dimensions of existence, as well as the mythic aspects of life.

An exceptional insight Jack.
Although interior monologues are a great source of insight as well,of which the novelist and poet are far better than the academic.

@Joshs

But there are powerful , often subversive ideas embedded in a piece of music or a work of literature , and the particular bits of technique and style that belong to that expression are unified by a thematic meaning , which can also be called a worldview. No matter how many stylistic changes a writer like Dickens or Shelly or Kafka might experiment with, their work as a whole amounts to variations on a theme, that theme being a worldview , at the same time psychological and philosophical. Often, Our dislike for a form of music or literature isn’t just subjective preference , but an inability to assimilate the worldview expressed by that creation. It has seemed to me that the persons I know with only a passing interest in and acquaintance with pop music , and an intense interest in classical music invariably identify with a more traditionalistic worldview. When I listen to classical music from the 1700’s through the early 20th century I am inspired to think via older philosophical tropes , but this same music represses my ability to push the boundaries of my thinking.

But the exact same applies to philosophical texts. All are the worldview of the writer.
I read a novel whilst allowing for the worldview,and i judge the insights on their relation to my real life experience.

I have always found the novel to be a far better expression of truth and wisdom than academic philosophy and science.
For instance dickens is far superior to Wittgenstein and any neuroscientists publications.
Do you agree or disagree?
What are your reasons? — Mystic

I'm a big champion of the story (not just the novel) for it's power to explore what we are. A good story is like a psychological resonator: it presents the brain with a counterfactual world that it can process somewhat like a factual one, and trigger reactions in a fairly scientific way, except you are both subject and observer.

However... all that tells us, and in quite a limited way, is what we are. It can't tell us why we are that way, or how other things are. Since both philosophy and science also attempt to answer 'why' questions, mythos would be a poor substitute.

I am not sure that story(or fiction) is absolutely only mythos and that philosophy and science are entirely explanatory. Fiction can incorporate some aspects of science and philosophy if it is brought in carefully. Similarly, science and philosophy have a certain amount of foundation in mythic assumptions. Of course, story is more metaphorical, but models and metaphors are often the combined foundations of our own viewpoints, and of all worldviews.

I am not sure that story(or fiction) is absolutely only mythos and that philosophy and science are entirely explanatory. — Jack Cummins

I didn't mean to suggest the latter for sure. I'll edit for clarity.

Fiction can incorporate some aspects of science and philosophy if it is brought in carefully. — Jack Cummins

It is still storytelling though, to the extent that I'd say that if it didn't resonate, it was a poor story, however much science and philosophy is thrown at it. Ethical thought experiments probably bear some similarity to story; indeed, many stories could potentially be thought of as ethical thought experiments with potential answers.

@Kenosha Kid Science and philosophy in academia are entirely mythos. Entirely models. Modern myths.
The novelist presents narratives of lived experiences.
The novelist can be questioned. The scientist wants you to shut up and calculate or follow. The philosopher wants you to accept his visions. To prove his vision is the one.
This notion of why and how is bogus. Just like the fact value dichotomy. All artificial constructs.

@Tom Storm I don't really class any writings as being necessarily about learning but about expressions of truth,or somewhat near accurate expressions of human experience.
And this myth of rationality?! Everything is an expression of emotions. There exists no such thing as rationality devoid of emotion.
Dickens novels,for instance oliver twist and hard times both express the hypocrisy,greed and cruelty of the upper class,whilst also showing the working class to be somewhat similiar as well. The solution for dickens is presented as genuine love and less thinking of people instrumentally or as objects to be counted and studied.

@180 Proof "Folk psychology" AKA common sense is superior to academic studies in the main simply because science and philosophy reduce humans to matter or abstract concepts. Whilst a great novel presents humans as living beings.
You can't beat lived experience bro.
You prefer porn to a wife!!!

Well, you might have me there. I am not going to criticise dostoevsky.

It is interesting to think how worldviews are embedded in literature and music, and also how these are embedded in our own assimilation of world views. I also think that the way we incorporate certain styles of writing and music together in our own construction of thought is interesting, whether it is classical style or more alternative ones.

On the basis of seeing me read classics and philosophy, I remember someone I knew making assumptions that I would like classical music. She was surprised to discover my own alternative indie, punk and psyche rock tastes. I really can't relate to classical music, but I can appreciate Tolstoy, Dostoevsky and many of the classic fiction writers.

I am sure that all of this comes down to the development of how we have assembled and assimilated worldviews. I think that it is about reason but is also based on the way we develop our own sense of aesthetics. I know that my own period where I could not relate to fiction coincided with my own time of reading in psychology. It seemed to be about needing to understand the mechanisms of thought processes.

I do believe that the way we relate to fiction is related to our whole perception and philosophical constructs, including the depth of our own values. While I do read classic fiction, I probably do still relate more to more alternative styles, including fantasy, post apocalyptic and steampunk. So, there is probably a link with my own alternative music tastes. But, all these areas of how we relate to fiction and academic writing do relate to our basic assumptions, which reflect our own integration and blending of aspects of worldviews. I am sure that this is extremely intricate because so much is based on logic and reason, but combined with our own aesthetic associations.

@Bartricks I'm a little surprised by your saying that. Dostoevsky is sometimes accused of being an anti-rationalist.
Or maybe he is just showing the limits of rationality as opposed to innate desire/emotion.

I was going to post this on the Gaza thread (which i hadn't even read until today), you and @Foghorn might consider exploring the many expressions of violence and conflict, for purposes of educating the conflict mongers and the trolls. I don't think these halfwits are aware of the subtleties that can be explored and observed, in such a topic. Just a suggestion.

This post from @skyblack makes me think of the difference between media representations of conflicts and the actual "lived experience" of living in a conflict.
During the Syria conflict I kept abreast of the situation by talking to a Syrian friend who had family living in Damascus. Their story was very much different from the media nonsense that was broadcast. And it was focused in living conditions and how those Syrians felt about the situation.
In a way a novel and better still a personal conversation about one's experience is better than all the political posturing and theorising about cultures people know nothing about in person. Too much book and media "knowledge" not enough experiential knowledge.