In Response to Kyle- “Q&A #6
Queston 1
In
Kyle’s post on the subject of critical monism-pluralism, he offered a new possibility
in regards to the process of interpretation: critical nihilism. Of course, this
would be the view that there is simply no correct interpretation of a work. In
this case, it seems that a work would not really be completely for any specific
purpose. Kyle gave the example of The Beatles, and how they would often produce
songs with no inherent meeting, which were produced only to confuse those that
would search endlessly for an underlying meaning.
While
I certainly think that critical nihilism should play a role in the process of interpreting some
works. I really do not think that this view would be correct for all works. I think
that it can be illustrated with evidential support that most works of
literature have some underlying meaning that can be deemed correct. I only
think critical nihilism can be applied to a certain group of anomalous works.
0 comments:
Post a Comment