Ce sujet est fermé
...Erield wrote...
2. Occam's razor: "is a principle urging one to select among competing hypotheses that
which makes the fewest assumptions and thereby offers the simplest
explanation
of the effect." [source: Wikipedia.] Anti-IT theory makes two
assumptions. First, what is presented in the game is 'real' so far as
we are concerned, in how it affects Shepard. Second, perceived
plot-holes and inconsistencies can be directly attributed to poor
storytelling exposition or rushed delivery of the game.
Trying to use Occam's Razor for Literary Interpretation again. You guys look like you never took a literature class in your lives when you do this.
You can't apply Occam's Razor to Literature (stories in movies, games, books, poetry) because of the fact that Hidden Meanings exist in stories, sometimes even without the author's concious intent. This means situations, events, and the meaning of the work can be more complex than what one would assume in a literal interpretation. Long story, short: You can't use a scientific tool to judge if a literary interpretation is true, especially when it has merit based on evidence gathered from the story.
Now you can say " it was rushed" all you like, but Bioware are storytellers and even rushed storytellers can place metaphors and symbolism in their work. It's not hard to to quickly do at all, if you have any talent at writing. Ask any writer.
From that page, which is the work of a college professor in English 211 at Goucher College in Baltimore, MD, :
" Most students begin by being very skeptical of the notion that there are "hidden meanings" in literature. This resembles a very wise logical rule called "Occam's razor," after William of Occam (or Ockham), the 14th-century monk who used it in logical debates about the metaphysics of angels and salvation. "Occam's razor" says that, when trying to explain something, we shouldn't unnecessarily multiply the number of invisible entities necessary to make it happen (e.g., angels, demons, aether, deans, etc.). The principle is an outgrowth of Aristotelian thinking that emphasizes the study of the material world using rational interpretations of independently verifiable phenomena. So we want words to mean what the dictionary says they mean for very good reasons. However, there are several other good reasons why literature might contain hidden meanings, that is, meanings that are not readily obvious to the casual reader and that can't be found in ordinary dictionaries. "
And this is what I see everytime one of you uses Occam's Razor on literature. You appear skeptical of hidden meanings in literature, which is silly since even the simplest Fairy Tales such as Cinderella and Red Riding Hood have a deeper meaning beneath that is not readily apparent without critical thinking.
It goes on to list the reasons. I won't post the entire page. The point is, it is the wrong tool to use when considering literary interpretations. Also, by the way (and not to single you out on this but I see it often), literary interpretations are not conspiracy theories nor are they religious in nature when dealing with a non-religious text. Saying so only shows an individual's incompetance in analytically interpreting literature or even considering serious analytical interpretation of art in general. In short, it shows you have no imagination nor the motive to use it to read the symbolism and metaphor of the arts.
Now, if this sounds condescending to you, then you have thin skin, for I am speaking only truth. If any of you have had a literature class in Junior High, High School, or at a University, this should all be common sense.
Modifié par BatmanTurian, 21 mai 2012 - 03:44 .
Retour en haut
