If narratives are imposed on us, if pain is taught to us, if love is defined for us, do we still “think”? Or are we merely “data” in a closed loop, endlessly repeating?
Kabul 24: Plato believed that the only possible form of thinking is “dialogue.” In other words, thinking is always a form of “speaking.” Speaking rests on two fundamental pillars: the “speaker” and the “listener.” Thus, even thinking in solitude is a kind of silent, internal conversation between me and myself.
Whether in the most private moments of reflection (being alone with oneself) or the most collective form of dialogue with others, all thought has a dialogical structure.
In this two-pillar structure, when I speak and the other listens, and then they speak and I listen, truth emerges between us. Truth only reveals itself in the process of dialogue when both parties mutually take on the roles of speaker and listener.
If one speaks and the other only listens, truth remains in the dark. Even when we think alone, the silent dialogue within us must take place for truth to manifest.
Thus, between the speaker and the listener, there is always a third world that exists in the “in-between,” and truth always emerges in that space during dialogue. Without the dialogical process, no truth is revealed.
This is why Plato believed that truth emerges along the way and is a “path”!Therefore, thinking is difficult. Through thinking, truth cannot appear to us absolutely all at once.
When we claim to have reached the ultimate truth about something, it means we are tired, lazy, and want to halt the journey and stop thinking.
Because we are always on the path of knowing, and truth, from our perspective, constantly changes.
This is because we have a fluid existence, constantly evolving. For example, the definition of courage or freedom we had in the past differs from what we understand today.
The more aware we become, the more we gain awareness of ourselves, and a new facet of the truth about something is revealed to us. Through constant thinking, we expand, our existence becomes richer, and our perception of truth deepens!
Thus, if someone, whether in dialogue with themselves or others, tries to eliminate one of the pillars of thought or demands that the other remain silent, they destroy thinking.
Because the only possible form of thinking is the dialogue between speaker and listener.Returning to the question posed at the beginning: Can we think in the complex conditions of today’s hybrid world?
Someone who cannot narrate themselves falters in the silent internal dialogue and thinking. Thinking requires that we, with the help of imagination, narrate our own stories and lived experiences.
If we are deprived of the power of narration, our inner speaker stumbles, and our inner listener becomes confused, turning the silent dialogue within us into an incomplete monologue.
This inability to narrate ourselves stems from our failure to see ourselves in temporal continuity, where the thread of our life’s story is broken, and as a result, our thinking becomes fragmented.
Thinking without the ability to narrate is like music without rhythm, discordant. Every day, I see many people around me who are not only incapable of narrating themselves but also lack the ability to write even two lines of an official letter and shy away from writing. By narrating ourselves, I mean the ability and power to express oneself coherently on paper.
The most important aspect of writing down our thoughts and narrating our experience of the world is not merely recording ideas but giving form and reality to a lived experience that becomes independent of us, allowing others to understand it and arrive at different insights.
Thus, the significant event in writing and narrating ourselves is that our experience of life and existence gains identity, becomes shareable, and takes on a dialogical quality.
Our narrative of lived experience, once written, is no longer limited to the will or intent of the narrator. It takes on a form of thought that, along its path, reveals a facet of truth and can reflect one aspect of reality itself.
Mozhgan Khalili
