briefnuts t1_j8dw3ql wrote on February 13, 2023 at 4:18 PM

Reply to comment by TheGrumpyre in [IMAGE] Be careful what you feed… by Rocky9711

I think you're focussing on exactly the right thing.

For example:

In "the Boy Who Cried Wolf" a young boy enjoys yelling “wolf” and laughing as the adults in his village run around in a panic. But one day, he sees an actual wolf, and cries out “wolf” to try and get someone to save him. But no one comes because noone believes him anymore.

Instead of just taking the lesson ("don't lie"), we should be putting all of our efforts into:

Who is this boy? Where did he come from? What type of wolf was it? Was it even an unfriendly wolf? When did this story take place? How old was the boy? Where were his parents? Why was there a wolf? Why was there a boy? What were his/her pronouns? What did his diet consist of? Did the boy have 2 wolves inside him too? Did 1 wolf escape? Was this why he cried wolf so much?

Conclusion: Only after getting the crucial context should we allow ourselves to take lessons from parables to heart.

TheGrumpyre t1_j8dyyop wrote on February 13, 2023 at 4:37 PM

Do you feel like all fiction is inherently duplicitous, just to a greater or lesser degree? It's all completely fake, of course. But I think that a work of fiction that claims to be a true story is not "more fake", but fake in a different way (vs a work of fiction that is up-front about being purely imaginary.)

Like, if James Cameron claimed that Titanic was based on the true romantic story of two real passengers on the Titanic, that's clearly not the same thing as making up a story about two fictional people on the Titanic.