Truman in the cave ^ ^,

Still remember my previous “Behind the right, lies another truth”, which is about allegory or parable? Well, this is my part 2 version of allegory. This time, I’ll compare it with the movie of The Truman Show.

    The Truman Show is a movie about the life of Truman Burbank that lives his life in a television studio since his birth. His life was unusual in the sense that he was the star of a reality television show. He didn’t know about it and it causes him to believe that the lifestyle he has been living was normal. Everyone that he knew in his life was an actor or actress pretending to be his mother, wife, friend, coworker, or neighbour. 

     The movie was broken up into three different "worlds". There was Truman's world, which consisted of everything he knew to be reality; the director's world, where the show and Truman's life were controlled; and the viewers' world, where the people, viewers, watched the life of this man religiously. The movie introduces Truman at a time where he is being to realise that there is something wrong with his life and by the end of the film shows his escape and realisation of the real world. 

     Truman Burbank life was unusual in the sense that he was the star of a reality television show. He was unaware of this fact causing him to believe that the lifestyle he was living was normal. In Plato's "Allegory of the Cave" the people in the cave, watching the puppets, were unaware of any other lifestyle or world other than the one in which they were presented. Truman was told by some people throughout his life that the life he was living was just a television show but he was unable to understand and ignored them. When the person in the cave was first told that there was more to life than the cave, he did not believe it. It was not until he witnessed the true world, life outside of the cave, that he knew and believed anything else. Although Truman was told about the other life, it was not until he saw and witnessed things for himself that he began to believe any of it. 

In both, Truman and the prisoners eventually escape. They get to see what the world is actually like.

Behind the right, lies another truth...

Imagine having lived your life on a basis or premise of a truth, then finding out one day that everything you ever believed in was wrong, completely a big monkey business! Have you ever thought about that? Would you be able to accept it and change your way of thinking?

     For me, it did come across my mind after I learn about Plato’s myth of the cave. Don’t be surprised because it’s quite surprising to me as well. It is undoubtedly a scary reality, but that is basically what I’ve learnt about allegory or parable. Allegory or parable is the symbolic expression of a deeper meaning through a story or scene acted out by human, animal, or mythical characters. It was originated apparently by Socrates however, his students Plato who relive it together with his own interpretations.

     Allegory is quite subjective. It is based on your own interpretation of the reality whether you want to believe it or not. If you believe it, there might be possibility that you are being conceived and blinded by your very own ignorance. However, if you didn’t believe it too, it will be a problem when you know about the truth and adapting to the truth itself is troublesome. You will be in dilemma and like a child, trying to learn again.

      At first I had a hard time relating the story of the Allegory and the Cave to our real life, but when I did it was kind of startling. It got me thinking about this important question, “who are the philosophers today (those who get out of the cave), that supposed to be the ones teaching the rest of us?” I don’t believe it’s neither the government, nor is it the makers of those documentaries. Maybe it’s a little bit of both. And since I’m not exactly sure who to believe, I’m probably going to go with “the shadows” I have in front of me. I’m sure Plato wouldn’t be happy with my decision.

    Facebook 

        vs. 

         twitter

Have you ever wonder if both facebook and twitter have a battle of popularity, which one would have won? Or which one is better? Also maybe which one should you used?  Currently, both Facebook and twitter are the most popular social networks using every day by millions of people around the world.

   Facebook appeals to people looking to reconnect with old friends and family members or find new friends online. The mash up of features like email, instant messaging, image and video sharing do feels familiar, while Twitter is a bit harder to get your arms around at first. Facebook is a social networking Portal that enable people to communicate within the network. Twitter on the other hand, encourages you grab ideals in byte-size chunks and use your updates as jumping off points to other places or just let others know what you’re up to at any given moment.

   There are reasons why people like these two and I can say that these both social networking are comfortable in their own comfort zone. The Facebook users prefer the social portal model versus having to log into Yahoo Messenger, Gmail, Hotmail, Flickr, YouTube, MySpace, and others. Facebook gives them a single alternative to all these applications, with one login and interface to manage their online social interaction needs. This largely explains the explosive growth Facebook continues to experience.

   As for twitter, the usefulness of it is not readily as obvious to some people as Facebook. Twitter encourages constant “linking out” to anywhere and, in that respect, is more analogous to a pure search engine and another way to find people and content all over the Net.When asked why they love Twitter, users say like “I can ask a question and get an instantaneous response”. They crave the ability to “tap into the collective consciousness” of others on the network, bouncing ideas off others with whom they would otherwise have no means of connecting.

In the end, both Twitter and Facebook are simply communication tools; both will continue to evolve and morph as users find new ways to extract value and either network may or may become a long term winner in the rapidly evolving social networking space. But, will either Twitter or Facebook become the next Google or will they fade into the rear view mirror of technological and social revolution? What do you think?

People’s hypocrisy: Are you a hypocrite??

   Being a hypocrite refers to a person who pretends to have or feigns something that he or she does not actually posses. In much simpler words, a hypocrite is a person whose actions contradict their stated on internal beliefs. (Or vice versa)

Now, believe it or not; there are four types of hypocrisy.

1.       Honest External hypocrites

Their stated beliefs contradict their actions. However, their stated beliefs are consistent with their actual internal beliefs. Therefore they are also honest internal hypocrites. They have strong convictions but do not always follow through.

2.       Dishonest External hypocrites

Their stated beliefs contradict their actions and their stated beliefs are not consistent with their actual beliefs. They often have weak convictions, and it is possible for them to be non-hypocritical on an internal level.

3.       Honest internal hypocrites

Their internal beliefs contradict their actions. Their internal beliefs remain constant despite their contradicting actions. They are honest with themselves, and strive not to place their beliefs around their own desires, actions, or imperfections.

4.       Dishonest internal hypocrites

The stated beliefs are consistent with actions but actual internal beliefs are not. They are often people pleasers with weak convictions.

   It is best not to be hypocritical, but sometimes you can’t avoid being one. As for me, I would rather be an honest hypocrite than being a person who tries to make truth around his or her own desires and imperfections. And that is the hard core truth.

Jack the ripper

“Jack the Ripper” is the best-known name given to an unidentified serial killer who was active around the Whitechapel district of London in 1888. The name originated in a letter, written by someone who claims to be the one that is responsible for the serial murder cases of the prostitutes. The truth behind the letter and the identification of the real killer can’t be confirmed up until now as the cases is never been solved.

     Attacks ascribed to the Ripper typically involved female prostitutes from the slums whose throats were cut prior to abdominal mutilations. The removal of internal organs from at least three of the victims led to proposals that their killer possessed anatomical or surgical knowledge.Rumors that the murders were connected intensified in September and October 1888, and letters from a writer or writers purporting to be the murderer were received by media outlets and Scotland Yard. The "From Hell" letter, received by George Lusk of the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee, included half of a preserved human kidney, supposedly from one of the victims. Mainly because of the extraordinarily brutal character of the murders, and because of media treatment of the events, the public came increasingly to believe in a single serial killer known as "Jack the Ripper".

      Extensive newspaper coverage bestowed widespread on the Ripper cases. An investigation into a series of brutal killings in Whitechapel up to 1891 was unable to connect all the killings conclusively to the murders of 1888, but the legend of Jack the Ripper solidified. As the murders were never solved, the legends surrounding them became a combination of genuine historical research, and folklore. There are now over one hundred theories about the Ripper's identity, and the murders have inspired multiple works of fiction nowadays.