What are the functions of myths/narratives? I believe myths and narratives have very valuable functions in every given society or culture. Myths and narratives help keep everybody or almost everybody in a society on the same track. They serve to show those people coming into the tribe or society or those who are being born into it, the way of life that has been adapted as according to their ancestors . "The myth defines what has the right to be said and done in the culture"(25). In other words as said in the book postmodernism, i believe what this is saying is that basically myths are the law of the land for certain societies. Therefore myths set the guidelines for the different cultures. What their ancestors have brought to the table and the custom and rituals they followed or invented provide the outline to what the society as a whole should act like or be like. Myths can be utilized as a way to steer the whole community in one direction and this could be a good thing or a bad thing depending on their usage in my view. Because they can be used to make people believe certain things that are not trues such as in a brave New World, or they can simply be utilized as a reference to how things can be done and not exactly force the inhabitants to abide by the law of the myths. Moreover for a more literal interpretation of myths/narratives , as said in Postmodernism book, "according to Lyotard, since science cannot depend upon science to legitimize itself, it must turn to narrative!". So therefore, narratives serve the function of in a way explaining and providing support for the actual use of science. Why is science used? what is the purpose of science? these questions cannot be answered by science itself and so therefore it is the job of narrative to make these justifications for the purpose of science. so basically science without narrative cannot exist, because the narratives are the backbone for science, and therefore stories are told to help provide feedback on the basis of science. we cannot answer the question"why should there be scientific activity in the first place? we cannot respond by saying because science is knowledge. but rather by stating a story, and saying, it is because science is god for the well being of the population, it helps to inform citizens about the good and bad things that are happening and how we as a whole can help fix them, therefore i have made a narrative to support this question.

Is the object of our existence to be efficient by producing more people, or by helping machines produce and ultimately control or behaviors, or is the real objective of our existence as human beings to be happy by the love we have between our family members, and the everyday "special moments" that happen at random? This is where i disagree with the book a brave new world. I don't believe that by making the world a technologically advanced place of mass production we will ultimately gain happiness and knowledge. On the contrary i think that what makes us happy is the fact that we do have freedom to live our lives the way we choose, and by doing so we are able to establish a lifestyle we choose that makes us who we are and happy. Individuality to me does not come as a "society as a whole" but rather as the individual person by himself. The way he chooses to dress and act, and the lifestyle he chooses to follow. By expressing "individuality" as the whole society as in brave new world, i think they are in reality solely establishing a controlled society which is subject to their ideas of happiness. I see the argument in a way, that the author is trying to send to the readers, and if happiness and success was really measured in production than it would totally be correct, but i don't see it that way and therefore i don't believe it to be reality. However, i do believe that that ideas expressed in this book are extremely catchy. Because we dont know what the future will ever be like, i mean look at our society now, it is already so technologically advanced that its almost impossible to believe. Therefore, i also appreciate the fact that the author went the way he did with his ideas, which may seem so weird to us, but who knows what will happen, and we cant say we haven't atleast gave some thought to these ideas before.

My blog you can read if ya want.

In class we talked about how history is written and what topics should be included and which ones should be emphasized more than others, but sadly there is where the problem lies. How do we know that the history that is set in "facts" through history books or in our minds is true. History is written by the winners, that is to say that history is and will always be distorted from reality no matter what. The reason being that those who win wars, win battles, or destroy civilizations will always project themselves in history and therefore history will always be told through their eyes and through their accomplishments. But does that necessarily mean that the truth is that of the winners, or is it that in a way we will be in a society like that of 1984 where reality is distorted by those who hold the power? Moreover i think it is very important to include minorities in history because they too have contributed to the way history has been created. It is not fair or accurate for certain groups to be left out pf history solely because they are/ or were not the powerful groups. That is almost like saying there is a war between germany and the U.S., the U.S. won but they dont include in history that the the U.S. won with the help of France. Therefore, i believe just as the powerful groups have led history the minorities should also be a part of something they contributed and even played a big role in.