Coherence in life Essay

However, fisher cat points out that we need specific advocate in the form of features that impudentlys reports must display (rather than merely the effects they may puddle) in order to decide whether or not they ar deserving of our adherence (1997315). This is what gumminess and fidelity, the two basic principles that define annals modestness and that embody the c at one timept of right-hand(a) reasons in Fishers double, allow us to do. narrative may be tested in relation to three types of coherence structural or argumentative material and charactero consistent.Structural coherence relates to inner(a) consistency whether or not the narrative reveals contradictions within itself. Material coherence is question of how narrative relates to other narratives that cover the same issue and that we be familiar with. More specifically, narrative can be tested with appreciate to the facts it superpower downplay or ignore the counterarguments it chooses not to engage with, and so forth.Characterological coherence assumes that the reliability of whatever narrative depends very largely on the credibility of its main characters as well as the characters narrating it. If the decisions and actions associated with character flip significantly in strange ways (Fisher 1997316) or contradict severally other, we inevitably question the credibility of the character and hence the narrative in question, Fisher indicates that, Coherence in life and literature requires that characters behave characteristically.Without this mixed bag of predictability, there is no trust, no rational order, no community (1997316) Hence, once we decide that granted person is trustworthy, honorable, courageous, and so on, we are prepared to drop off and forgive many things factual errors if not too dramatic, lapses m reasoning, and daily discrepancies. In addition to testing for coherence, we also test narratives for fidelity, Here, the focus is on assessing () the elements of narrative that may be regarded as its reasons and (b) the value that the narrative promotes.For Fisher superb reasons are those elements that provide warrants for accepting or adhering to the advice fostered by any form of communication that can be considered rhetorical. Fisher stresses, however, that the concept of good reasons does not imply that every element of rhetorical transaction that warrants belief, attitude, or action that any good reason-is as good as any other.It only signifies that whatever is taken as basis for adopting rhetorical message is inextricably bound to value-to conception of the good. Assessing the values explicitly or implicitly promoted by narrative means asking what effects adhering to it would have on the world, on our ability to maintain our sense of self respect, and on our relationship to others.As Fisher argues, we ultimately have to ask purge if prima facie case has been made or burden of proof has been established, are the values foste red by the story those that would constitute an ideal basis for valet de chambre conduct? (1997317) It is this ability to judge narratives on the basis of their moral implications and the values they promote that ultimately guides human behavior and allows communities to gather around given narrative or set of narratives. Fishers narrative figure has two principal strengths in the current context.First, because it privileges moral values, it explains why active communities can form across boundaries of nation, color, gender, profession, and almost any other contribution one can think of, without any motivation of personal gain-indeed, very much at great personal risk to individual members of the community. Second, the narrative paradigm goes beyond explaining why communities emerge and unite around narratives, It specifically anchors this surgical procedure in the notions of narrative rationality and good reasons, which imply considerable histrionics on the part of individu als and communities.As storytellers we do more than choose from common narratives in our own societies If we judge the moral consequences of these narratives negatively, we can look elsewhere for better narratives or even elaborate narratives of our own. This is precisely what communities of activists, including those forming within the master world of translation, attempt to do-they organize and select narratives on the basis of good reasons, looking beyond the dominant narratives of their cultures, often selecting counter narratives or elaborating new ones.It is worth pointing out that much of the impetus for narrative research in general, including Fishers work, comes from belief among theorists working in this area that the unexamined assumptions of narratives inter patterns of domination and submission, which exclude the experience of large sectors of society while legitimating and promoting those of the political, economic, and heathen elite.There is also general agreemen t in the literature that narrative both reproduces the existing power structures and provides means of contesting them If stories can be constructed to hem in off the senses to the dilemmas and contradictions of social life, perhaps they also can be presented in ways that open up the mind to creative possibilities developed in ways that provoke intellectual struggle, the resolution of contradiction, and the creation of more viable human order.More specifically, narrative theorists acknowledge that undermining existing patterns of domination cannot be achieved with concrete forms of activism alone (such as demonstrations, sit-ins, and civil disobedience) but must get hold of direct challenge to the stories that sustain these patterns. As language mediators, translators and interpreters are unequivocally placed to initiate this type of discursive intervention at spherical level.The narrative paradigm, then, and narrative theory more generally offer model that generates sens e of what is good as well as what is strictly logical in the stories that people might adopt, explaining how individuals and communities can exercise sufficient histrionics to imagine that other world is possible, to use the well cognise slogan of the World Social Forum, serviced by the translators and interpreters in Babels. suggest we might rewrite this motto in the present context as another narrative is possible.