Jean Descole (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
scientificflair) wrote2012-12-08 12:39 pm
scientificflair) wrote2012-12-08 12:39 pm
007. [Audio/also a couple of other things.]
[AUDIO]
[More violin music over Descole's feed today; it's an incredibly simplified version of Song of the Stars - although really, someone ought to teach him the Jeopardy theme, considering how much that instrument gets whipped out when he's feeling like bombarding the network with both the fact that he can't hold all his feels, and he has something best described as "pseudo-philosophical what" to say.
As before, he plays for a while before the melody fades and shifts into something long and drawn-out, idling while he speaks; the sound is quieter, as though the violin has been directed away from the 'Gear a bit.]
There's a famous thought experiment that poses the following:
Imagine yourself standing outside a large field; you see, in the distance, what looks to you to be a specific animal - for simplicity's sake, let's say a bull. You then form the belief that there is a bull in the field. And you are correct - there is, indeed, a bull in the field. However, the bull is lying down behind a hill, just outside your line of vision; you can't see it from your current position. Moreover, what you actually saw was a tarp that had gotten tangled over a bush; from outside the field, it looked like a bull, but actually wasn't anything of the sort.
Again, you were factually correct, and you had a well-justified true belief that there was a bull in the field. However, can you really say you knew?
[He pauses for a moment, continuing to play quietly while he thinks.]
And if you were to find yourself in such a situation - where a belief is true and well-justified, and yet the proof of it being true isn't where you believe it is - would you say that your belief was any less valid?
[And with that, the feed cuts off.]
[PRIVATE TEXT TO FLUTTERSHY]
Miss Fluttershy,
I have something to ask you, should it not be an inconvenience.
[PRIVATE TEXT TO COLONEL ARCHER]
There's something that we need to discuss.
Now.
[More violin music over Descole's feed today; it's an incredibly simplified version of Song of the Stars - although really, someone ought to teach him the Jeopardy theme, considering how much that instrument gets whipped out when he's feeling like bombarding the network with both the fact that he can't hold all his feels, and he has something best described as "pseudo-philosophical what" to say.
As before, he plays for a while before the melody fades and shifts into something long and drawn-out, idling while he speaks; the sound is quieter, as though the violin has been directed away from the 'Gear a bit.]
There's a famous thought experiment that poses the following:
Imagine yourself standing outside a large field; you see, in the distance, what looks to you to be a specific animal - for simplicity's sake, let's say a bull. You then form the belief that there is a bull in the field. And you are correct - there is, indeed, a bull in the field. However, the bull is lying down behind a hill, just outside your line of vision; you can't see it from your current position. Moreover, what you actually saw was a tarp that had gotten tangled over a bush; from outside the field, it looked like a bull, but actually wasn't anything of the sort.
Again, you were factually correct, and you had a well-justified true belief that there was a bull in the field. However, can you really say you knew?
[He pauses for a moment, continuing to play quietly while he thinks.]
And if you were to find yourself in such a situation - where a belief is true and well-justified, and yet the proof of it being true isn't where you believe it is - would you say that your belief was any less valid?
[And with that, the feed cuts off.]
[PRIVATE TEXT TO FLUTTERSHY]
Miss Fluttershy,
I have something to ask you, should it not be an inconvenience.
[PRIVATE TEXT TO COLONEL ARCHER]
There's something that we need to discuss.
Now.
[voice]
Truth is distinct from fact. In this case, you couldn't be blamed for honestly expressing what you believed to be true, even if it turned out to be fact only by technicality.
As for the validity of beliefs...well, that's simply how perception works, isn't it? By nature, we assume a lot about the parts of the world we can't perceive. The authenticity of a grazing bull, for instance, but also the dangers that might be encountered around corners, or the intentions of the people around us, or things far more mundane than that. It's important to allow for variable perception when considering anything so steeped in perception as "belief" and "truth".
This isn't really related, but do you own many books? [extremely subtle gift-related questions]
[voice]
this is why he likes you
at any rate, it's obvious that he's a bit amused by the sudden topic swerve; he'll get to that first, a bit of a laugh behind his words, though it isn't mocking or anything.]
I don't own as many as I'd like, I'll admit; this place keeps me rather busy, and I haven't had as much time to really see what this world has to offer.
As for the rest...well. That's a good way of putting it, actually, though I do have to question what should be done in circumstances where allowing for variations in perception may have disastrous results - where not acting on one's suspicions may bear serious consequences, but acting on them and being incorrect may likewise not end very well. What then?
[voice]
...So it's one of those situations. [He's not unfamiliar with them, himself.] Well, nature's a harsher judge than man or monster could hope to be, and the self harsher yet. But you don't need me to tell you that...
["Hmmm."
See, what he usually does is run to Kuruna to share his concerns, and the two of them come to a decision about what to do. And if the outcome isn't the best...well, they'd share the guilt. That's one of the benefits of having a time-tested friendship.
Whatever problem Descole's having, that method likely isn't going to be an option.]
Just how serious a set of consequences are we talking about?
[voice]
At any rate, there's a good patch of verbal silence once the question is asked, though the fact that the violin is still audible is more than enough to imply that he's still there and hasn't just ragequit the conversation or anything. As he does.
Just thinking, really; he's never been terribly fond of sharing anything regarding his issues with anyone, and this is pretty much a Colossal Issue.]
I don't know just yet; the people I'm dealing with aren't entirely unlike anything I've handled before, but the circumstances are different here.
The consequences may be more dire for another person than they are for myself, however, in either scenario.
[...well, that probably told you a whole lot of nothing, but he's trying, okay.]
[private voice]
gonna casually private this]
I think I have a general sense of what you're talking about. Mm...might you be able to enlist some help with this problem of yours? To gather more information, or give you a fallback plan in case of emergency...whatever's most appropriate to the situation.
[private voice]
Better than nothing, at any rate.]
...that's not exactly something I'm accustomed to doing. I've been in similar situations back in London; in my experience, involving more people than necessary is out of the question.
[private voice]
Ah. For what it's worth, I would readily offer my aid...but even if it were requested, and whatever the exact details are, I fear I'd be of little help. [Shitty team, lack of useful contacts. Ondorus chuckles apologetically.] The best I can offer is moral support.
What about the aforementioned person, the one receiving the consequences - is there any way of explaining the situation to them, or are they already aware?