If perception, or rather, experience is reality, then who is to say "how it really exists?"
If Al Sharpton's experience with the chasm has been the bottom picture, than FOR HIM, the chasm is as he portrays it, because ultimately the reality of the chasm is what people actually experience.
I'm not actually saying Sharpton's description is correct, nor that is incorrect. I'll use an analogy to make the point I'm trying to make:
There's been a reported problem with the harrassment of women at secular and skeptic conventions for years. Many women have complained. One woman never experienced this harrassment, and said: "I've never experienced this. You must be exaggerating, or making it up, or overreacting."
Who is correct? The woman saying "it's no big deal" is describing the chasm that SHE has experienced. The other women are describing a chasm that THEY have experienced. Both experiences are valid and factual - but they problem is when someone tries to use their own "chasm experience" to diminish or deny the existance of someone else's chasm.
In other words, the chasm might be different for different people, because we all have different experiences and advantages and disadvantages and surroundings... some have bridges or tightropes or nothing, and for some it's a small hop and for others maybe a gigantic gap. Where we run into problems is when those who have almost no gap, with a gigantic bridge with handrails and a monorail, turn to others and say: "The gap doesn't look so bad to me. I don't know why you're making such a big deal!" while those people are forced to try to Nik Wallenda over the tightrope that's the only way across THEIR massive, gaping chasm.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2013-07-25 03:27 pm (UTC)If Al Sharpton's experience with the chasm has been the bottom picture, than FOR HIM, the chasm is as he portrays it, because ultimately the reality of the chasm is what people actually experience.
I'm not actually saying Sharpton's description is correct, nor that is incorrect. I'll use an analogy to make the point I'm trying to make:
There's been a reported problem with the harrassment of women at secular and skeptic conventions for years. Many women have complained. One woman never experienced this harrassment, and said: "I've never experienced this. You must be exaggerating, or making it up, or overreacting."
Who is correct? The woman saying "it's no big deal" is describing the chasm that SHE has experienced. The other women are describing a chasm that THEY have experienced. Both experiences are valid and factual - but they problem is when someone tries to use their own "chasm experience" to diminish or deny the existance of someone else's chasm.
In other words, the chasm might be different for different people, because we all have different experiences and advantages and disadvantages and surroundings... some have bridges or tightropes or nothing, and for some it's a small hop and for others maybe a gigantic gap. Where we run into problems is when those who have almost no gap, with a gigantic bridge with handrails and a monorail, turn to others and say: "The gap doesn't look so bad to me. I don't know why you're making such a big deal!" while those people are forced to try to Nik Wallenda over the tightrope that's the only way across THEIR massive, gaping chasm.