Webster defines "ambiguous" as something that is "capable of being understood in two or more possible senses or ways". The result is another definition: "uncertain or doubtful". For example, the word "passed" could mean, "He passed the football". Or it could mean, "I passed him in the hallway". And it could be used this way, "He passed". By itself the word is ambiguous and its exact meaning uncertain. When we use it in a sentence passed suddenly makes sense. It is clear because of the context in which it is being used. Otherwise, we are uncertain as to its meaning.
Movie endings can be filled with ambiguity. Did the couple get back together in the closing scene? Did the hero live or die or remain an invalid? Sometimes a movie with an uncertain conclusion can be unsatisfying if we want a "happy ending" or least a clear cut curtain. On the other hand, a movie with an uncertain ending can be intriguing when we fill in our own possible interpretations.
However, when it comes to life we prefer to have clear boundaries of right and wrong or truth versus falsehood. As Jack Webb, from Dragnet used to say, "Just the facts, Ma'am." But what happens to us when the facts don't add up or can be interpreted in a variety of ways. Ask a police officer what kind of "facts" she gets when asking witnesses to describe the "perp?" Ambiguity among their statements.
There are two sides to us (plus more): Modern and postmodern thinking. Our modernist thinking likes things black and white with few if any shades of grey. Our postmodern side prefers uncertainty, doubts, non-clarity, ambiguity. "Modern thinking prefers "I'm sure." Postmodern thinking prefers "I'm not so sure."
Another example: Which reason do you have for fighting the war in Iraq and the two other countries? Let's pretend there are five possible answers. Our "reasonable" side would probably agree with the government's story. Or with our friend's story. Or our political party's story. Or some media explanation. Whichever we would select would become the reason for those wars. (Usually our answer would be along the lines of "fighting terrorists"). Our answer becomes the answer and "that settles that". No ambiguity here.
The other side of us, the postmodern side will not settle for a simple answer to a complex situation like war. Pretend a postmodern thinker were given ten reasons for those wars which do you think she would pick. Several. Maybe even many. And this thinker would say "There are many factors at play. There are economic, political, religious, etc. reasons on all sides of the issue. It depends. Some of the reasons I may see as invalid and not worthy of war and others..."
Two, at least, emotional responses arise out of our two sided thinking. There is a part of us that prefers certainty and the rationality of feeling certain. We prefer the confidence that comes from being sure about a thing. On the other hand, we know life is very uncertain and if we let in the ambiguous stuff we will probably feel anxious,worried, scared. But it gets in anyway, at times.
Modernists and postmodernists agree there are many solutions to the ambiguous state of being both certain and uncertain at the same time: religion, psychology, philosophy, reason, etc.
How do you deal with ambiguity, uncertainty, doubt, the color "grey", the many possible "answers", the numerous viewpoints, and the multitude of ethical and relational choices?
No comments:
Post a Comment