The Mothman Prophecies
The extract of the Mothman Prophecies which we heard described an incident that saw the amalgamation of superstition, coincidence and paranormal belief. The excerpt highlighted an instance at which a couple was visited in the dark of night by an unexpected visitor, dressed in morbid albeit formal attire. The appearance of the stranger formed the basis for the impression the couple formed of him, highlighting how perception can form the basis for judgment. There appears little to indicate why the stranger approached their house, but because of his apparel and the atmosphere outside, the couple perceived him to be threatening. This laid the platform for the development of fear; an emotion. The atmosphere was stormy and windy, and the setting was complimented by the nature of the town in which it was not a usual occurrence for random strangers to approach. The obvious novelty of the situation would have led to the development and production of many emotions, foremost of which would have been fear. It was this fear that would have haunted the couple, and reminded them of the incident, rather than having them forget it immediately. Emotion can therefore be attributed as the cause for the almost omnipresent nature of the memory that continued to be with the couple long after that fateful night. The 4 ways of knowing contributed in equal part to taking the situation to its climax; at least the rising point of the extract. Reason too cannot be ignored. Keeping in mind that the couple had been educated it is apparent that they had an idea and a belief as per the existence of the devil. Was that man really the devil? According to the reasoning of the couple and their friends, he was. Although the reasoning was clouded by religious bias, and knowledge of possibility, the couple obviously reasoned out the visit of the stranger to befitting with their belief in the paranormal, and the concept of the devil. This belief would therefore have been strengthened by the occurrence of this incident; despite acknowledging that from a rational perspective the incident could have been a mere coincidence and happened to anybody else.
Knowledge has been defined as justified true belief. Was the couple’s belied justified? Perhaps. Was it true? The question poses an inherent tautology which is best left unanswered, up to personal opinion. The couple however, believed that it was true, and this led to the involvement of the fourth way of knowing: language. As the couple narrated the incident to their friends, they only had the basis of their interpretation of the event was based on the narration they received. Whether it was exaggerated or inaccurate in parts it is difficult to say. In keeping with the vehement belief the couple had, when considered with the time period (1967), superstition and belief in the paranormal world, it can be determined that the couple believed that it was knowledge that they had been visited by the devil. This “knowledge” was propagated by them, and therefore, when they died in the bridge collapse the immediate conclusion reached was that it had been the fulfillment of the foreboding and foreshadowing apparition they had witnessed. How did one reach this conclusion? It seems apparent that by using coherence the couple’s friends put two and two together to try and explain their sudden demise. However, in keeping with the same they did not consider the others who had also died during the incident, one of the primary pieces of evidence which suggests that it was in fact, nothing more than a coincidence. This leads me to believe, that the friends reasoning too was to a certain extent clouded by emotion, because about 40 years into the future and from a completely unbiased perspective it appears to me that their death was nothing more than a mere coincidence, albeit one in a series which would be rare but not impossible. I cannot say with absolute conviction that they had been visited by the devil, and therefore I cannot relate the two incidents. It appears therefore, that the two events may have been entirely unrelated, and that the couple and their friends may have been victims of their own blind beliefs.
The extract of the Mothman Prophecies which we heard described an incident that saw the amalgamation of superstition, coincidence and paranormal belief. The excerpt highlighted an instance at which a couple was visited in the dark of night by an unexpected visitor, dressed in morbid albeit formal attire. The appearance of the stranger formed the basis for the impression the couple formed of him, highlighting how perception can form the basis for judgment. There appears little to indicate why the stranger approached their house, but because of his apparel and the atmosphere outside, the couple perceived him to be threatening. This laid the platform for the development of fear; an emotion. The atmosphere was stormy and windy, and the setting was complimented by the nature of the town in which it was not a usual occurrence for random strangers to approach. The obvious novelty of the situation would have led to the development and production of many emotions, foremost of which would have been fear. It was this fear that would have haunted the couple, and reminded them of the incident, rather than having them forget it immediately. Emotion can therefore be attributed as the cause for the almost omnipresent nature of the memory that continued to be with the couple long after that fateful night. The 4 ways of knowing contributed in equal part to taking the situation to its climax; at least the rising point of the extract. Reason too cannot be ignored. Keeping in mind that the couple had been educated it is apparent that they had an idea and a belief as per the existence of the devil. Was that man really the devil? According to the reasoning of the couple and their friends, he was. Although the reasoning was clouded by religious bias, and knowledge of possibility, the couple obviously reasoned out the visit of the stranger to befitting with their belief in the paranormal, and the concept of the devil. This belief would therefore have been strengthened by the occurrence of this incident; despite acknowledging that from a rational perspective the incident could have been a mere coincidence and happened to anybody else.
Knowledge has been defined as justified true belief. Was the couple’s belied justified? Perhaps. Was it true? The question poses an inherent tautology which is best left unanswered, up to personal opinion. The couple however, believed that it was true, and this led to the involvement of the fourth way of knowing: language. As the couple narrated the incident to their friends, they only had the basis of their interpretation of the event was based on the narration they received. Whether it was exaggerated or inaccurate in parts it is difficult to say. In keeping with the vehement belief the couple had, when considered with the time period (1967), superstition and belief in the paranormal world, it can be determined that the couple believed that it was knowledge that they had been visited by the devil. This “knowledge” was propagated by them, and therefore, when they died in the bridge collapse the immediate conclusion reached was that it had been the fulfillment of the foreboding and foreshadowing apparition they had witnessed. How did one reach this conclusion? It seems apparent that by using coherence the couple’s friends put two and two together to try and explain their sudden demise. However, in keeping with the same they did not consider the others who had also died during the incident, one of the primary pieces of evidence which suggests that it was in fact, nothing more than a coincidence. This leads me to believe, that the friends reasoning too was to a certain extent clouded by emotion, because about 40 years into the future and from a completely unbiased perspective it appears to me that their death was nothing more than a mere coincidence, albeit one in a series which would be rare but not impossible. I cannot say with absolute conviction that they had been visited by the devil, and therefore I cannot relate the two incidents. It appears therefore, that the two events may have been entirely unrelated, and that the couple and their friends may have been victims of their own blind beliefs.
1 comment:
Excellent analysis from a TOK perspective. Appropriate references to the ways of knowing. Sound conclusion. Well done. Keep up the good work. :)
Post a Comment