You're probably too busy watching worthy scientific programmes I guess
The point was, hope is not false, it's hope. The outcome may not happen, but that doesn't make hope itself "false". Hope is good, in itself, it's generally a positive state.
No, just different TV rubbish. CSI, for example; Smallville (although it got a bit silly); House; Bodies; I, Claudius; and fillums.
Um, yeah, I get that; but if you encourage someone to hope when you know there isn't any - 'Don't worry, I'll still be here when you get back home' said by someone who is already packed and waiting for the taxi - then isn't the hope false?The point was, hope is not false, it's hope. The outcome may not happen, but that doesn't make hope itself "false". Hope is good, in itself, it's generally a positive state.
Wow, I didn't expect this to be controversial.
If something cannot happen, and yet A wants it to happen, and B assures A that it will happen, A is given hope that something will happen which cannot happen...
I'll start again.
A fervently desires an outcome O, over which he has no control. B assures A that O will happen. A therefore has hope that O will happen.
If B does not know one way or the other, or if he knows that O will happen, A has hope. However, the phrase we used to describe A's state of mind when B knows all along that O is impossible is false hope.
Of course A's feelings are the same either way (at least, until O eventuates) but that is why in the latter case the hope is false. It is trivially simple to imagine circumstances where A is going to be that much more devastated by the non-occurrence of O than if he or she was able to prepare for the worst from an earlier time.
People never do
That is one way of looking at it. A slightly nicer way of looking at it is that there's no such thing as false hope
Even if all chances are gone, all dreams are dashed, everything is dark, all seems lost.... there is still hope to keep us going - and it can sometimes make all the difference, believe me.
Well, if the pair of you do not see any distinction - between giving hope to someone in circumstances where hope exists, and giving hope to someone in circumstances where there is no hope - then don't use the phrase. Situations where things are bleak can fall, clearly, into either category. And of course, false hope is not necessarily a bad thing. That would depend entirely on the circumstances.
But to deny that there is such a thing as false hope seems...what? wilfully blind?
I wonder it this is another manifestation of the modern craze for primatising the feelings of the individual, regardless of how useful (or indeed indispensable) other points of view are.
However, you'll both know what the more sensible half of the population mean when we use the phrase, won't you?
(Oh, by the way: what's not "nice" about asserting that there is such a thing as false hope? Have you wrongly jumped to the conclusion that I consider giving false hope is always wrong?)
I see the distinction. It's flapping around over there... in the distance.... I wonder what it's up to?
Optimistic?
Oook. Southern man use big words again. Help!
It seems I have yet to meet them.
How can you give someone something that doesn't exist?
I think you are both right in a way but are missing the joining up bit between you?
When initially experiencing hope, the mind will not know the eventual outcome so the feeling should be the same.
However, if you look beyond the initial feelings then surely there is such a thing as false hope? If you give someone hope when there isn't any chance then, when their have their hopes dashed, the emotional fall may be great. Ok, so this may happen if there was a chance of things improving but they didn't. However, surely the inevitability of an emotional crash (clumsy term i know) makes it different for both the person who has been given hope (and probably given away money ) and the person who has given them hope (and received money ). Therefore, the immediate impact is not the same but the long-term difference emotionally (and therefore morally) is different.
To me, to be given false hope means to be given the hope that something can be achieved although it actually turns out to be impossible. Using it for things which are possible but don't work out in the end is wrong is a bit more dubious.
I 'hope' ( ) that is fairly clear anyway.
'Hope is the denial of reality. It is the carrot dangled before the draft horse to keep him plodding along in a vain attempt to reach it.'
'Are you saying we should just give up?' Tanis asked, irritably tossing the bark away.
'I'm saying we should remove the carrot and walk forward with our eyes open,' Raistlin answered. ~ Dragons of Autumn Twilight
A man has walked for miles along a long Irish lane. He sees a farmer and his wife in the field and asks
"Excuse me, how far is it to Cork from here?"
the Farmer replied
"Oh not far now, only another mile or so"
The man smiled and continued on his journey
When he was out of earshot the farmer's wife asked him
"Why did you say that? It's a good 5 miles to Cork from here "
"Ah sure enough, but the poor lad needed some hope to keep him going"
Galen: "There is always hope. Only because that is the one thing that no one has figured out how to kill yet."
Dureena "You wouldn't say that if you'd seen what I've seen"
Galen: "Perhaps I have seen more than you can imagine" ~ Crusade
I would agree hope is a state of mind, but the original quote was "there is no such thing as false hope", which is blatant nonsense. we use "false hope" as a term to describe an unrealistic or impossible hope. You can argue that hope is always hope because it is a state of mind, but "false hope" is simply a clearer definition and not a "different kind of hope" at all. Barry was only using "hope" as a measure of probability to try and explain this to you, I could hope you would "get it" at some point, but i fear that would be a false hope
As I thought - you are confusing the state of mind of the hoper with the objective situation. Clearly the hoper is unlikely to know that the hope is false, since otherwise the hope would probably be abandoned.
But you are missing the importance of the understanding of those other than the hoper. Say, for example, A tells B that B has every likelihood of passing an exam, in circumstances where A knows without question that B will fail (actually, this example works quite well even where A only thinks it highly likely). B could spend the next period of time prior to the results coming out organising himself to cope with failure; arranging for a retake or rethinking his position generally. Instead, he's going to spend his time blissfully planning for his post-exam life, whatever that may be. There is, therefore, a strong argument that A ought to tell B what he really thinks.
That's just a f'rinstance. There may be any number of reasons why it might be better for the hoper to face reality now, rather than later, and this is why the concept of false hope exists.
The problem with the concept of false hope is that it is just a person/group of people’s opinion. Until the final outcome, no-one can know whether the hope is “false” or justified.
Using your exam situation analogy, it is quite feasible that the hope given by A to B might spur B on to actually pass the exam because s/he believes they can do it, despite what A might really think (the self-fulfilling prophecy). If A was honest in their opinion (and it is just an opinion), then that might discourage B to the point that s/he gives up and fails as a consequence. After all, what’s the point if A thinks it’s hopeless?
Reality is highly subjective. We filter it through our own perceptions, no matter how much we like to think we are being objective. No-one can be. Doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t strive for it however. So bearing that in mind, is it better for A to give encouragement to B despite their own perceptions, or give B their perception of reality to work with, which might actually be as false as the hope you are referring to?
I see what happened; I didn't make it clear. In my hypothetical situation, B has already taken the exam. And I have endeavoured to strictly confine my comments to situations where the hope is for something that cannot eventuate. In an earlier hypothetical, I had the girlfriend saying to the boyfriend 'See you when you get home', because she wants to avoid the hassle of an argument at breakfast, but when she has already decided to leave. She has quite clearly given him hope that they can rescue their relationship, when no such possibility exists. He still has a pleasant day, but when he gets home - bam! No girlfriend. He hoped, but his hopes were false. Isn't this obvious? There must be a million false hope situations arising every day.
There is also a theme here that people are not distinguishing between false hope and disappointed (or 'dashed') hope.
The discussion was started by me saying that false hope may be better than no hope. If the teacher was simply opining that the student might fail the exam, that wouldn't be a 'hope' situation at all. Hope is pretty much reserved for situations where we cannot control and may not even be able to influence the outcome. Before the exam you might hear "I hope there's a question about Wittgenstein" but after the exam you will more likely hear "I hope I pass(ed)!"
As for the suggestion that reality is subjective - NO! Reality is objective. Although it must be conceded that people's perception of reality is subjective. That's why it's important to assess carefully what things are real (bacon sandwiches, evolution) from things which may be real (human-caused global warming, generous scotsmen) and things which are not real (elfs, pixies, subluxation).
Last edited by Barry Shnikov; 5th-February-2007 at 02:36 PM.
Scary to think people think Reality is subjective, reality is er...real
Surprised you didn't include Gods in the last section there People have a great deal of trouble figuring out what is real or not despite "help" from TV and Film . Personally I think Australia was made up by someone and doesn't really existReality is objective. Although it must be conceded that people's perception of reality is subjective. That's why it's important to assess carefully what things are real (bacon sandwiches, evolution) from things which may be real (human-caused global warming, generous scotsmen) and things which are not real (elfs, pixies, subluxation).
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks