Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Being convinced that we need something is not the same as something being necessary for us

of course it isn't. all i am saying is that arguing about that difference is not helpful.

whose main goal is to convince us we need something

which is no different than trying to convince us that we don't need a narrative.

this is the problem i have with dominant religions today. to much focus on the narrative itself. not enough focus on using the narrative to solve actual problems. narratives are being treated as if they are the solutions in themselves, as if only believing the narrative will solve our problems automatically.

instead of pushing a narrative, what we really need is to adress the problems humanity is facing today. i'll use a narrative for those that need it, if it helps them to understand why certain problems need to be solved, but for those that don't need a narrative to do that, i won't. i don't care about people believing the narrative, i care about them solving problems.

The topic is not that much about are narratives a necessity, but what they lead to

true. the actual narrative needs to be carefully chosen. not all narratives are good, and bad narratives do need to be replaced. but again, it is easier to come up with a better narrative than to convince someone that the narrative is not needed.




After reading all above, i am convinced that the three of us are saying the same. The only difference is our definition of 'narrative', a term pksitioned somewhere on the long gray area between religion and a suggestion.


ones personal suggestion could be someone else's religious mandate. that's part of the thing with stories. everyone is free to take them as serious as they like. for good and for bad. we all know the cases where someone takes a particular story to serious and goes overboard trying to live by it.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: