Interpretation #

The Australian Curriculum defines scientific literacy as:

An ability to use scientific knowledge, understanding, and inquiry skills to identify questions, acquire new knowledge, explain science phenomena […] and draw evidence-based conclusions in making sense of the world, and to recognise how understandings of […] science help us make responsible decisions and shape our interpretations of information.

We are of course “a part of all we have met”, (Tennyson) and so our conditioning plays a great role in how we perceive things.

Much of history, social and literary criticism has the quality of one of those inkblot tests in which everyone sees what they want to see. The process aspires to be objective, however it more often becomes intuitive, imaginative and capricious.

The Rorschach test is a psychological test in which subjects' perceptions of inkblots are recorded and then analysed using psychological interpretation, complex algorithms, or both. Some psychologists use this test to examine a person’s personality characteristics and emotional functioning. It has been employed to detect underlying thought disorder, especially in cases where patients are reluctant to describe their thinking processes openly. The test is named after its creator, Swiss psychologist Hermann Rorschach.

Literature communicates through word associations, figurative language, symbols, metaphor, images and sound patterns that resonate in different ways to different people.

In Faulkner’s A Rose for Emily, the clause describing Colonel Sartoris: “he who fathered the edict that no Negro woman should appear on the streets without an apron”, was interpreted variously.

Three readers singled out the word *“fathered” * as a touch of ironic humour. *** ***Some saw it as heroic, others as neutral and abstract while the third as sexual.

“Fathering” as in originating and owning the statement.

Ideologically it could refer to paternalism; “fathering” the state of affairs – a dominating unquestionable mindset.

The sexual; “fathering” the edict seems in some suggestive way as fathering the woman, through inter racial sexual intercourse.

Language and Purpose #

There are many different purposes for which we use language, both spoken and written. Often there is an underlying (covert) purpose of which we may not be aware, as well as the apparent (overt) purpose.

Take the incident of two men and a woman in a railway carriage. One man smokes, unaware that it is a non—smoking carriage. After a few minutes the other man turns to the woman and says:

“DO YOU mind if I smoke?”

Let us Look at the purpose here.

  1. Overt purpose — to discover if he may smoke (conscious).

  2. Possible covert purpose

a) to establish contact with and ingratiate himself with the woman

b) to reproach the other man.

Even if he did not intend to reprove the first man, his words may have the effect of doing so.

Despite the fact that lexicographers use common usage, some, unless you agree with Humpty Dumpty, lexicographers give the provenance of language to its common usage, not the preserve of any Judge, regardless of how lofty, aloof or arrogant they can puff themselves up to be.
Words are subject to interpretations:

Pickwickian interpretation involves **words or ideas meant or understood in a sense different from the apparent or usual one. Unless you agree with Humpty Dumpty, *"****a word means whatever I wish it to mean, and that is all!" ***lexicographers give the provenance of language to its common usage, not the preserve of any Judge, regardless of how lofty, aloof or arrogant they can puff themselves up to be.

Examples of deception in reporting deaths:

A respectable family’s uncle was condemned to death by electrocution for a nasty crime. To salvage the family reputation, they negotiated the following media release to make it appear innocuous:

*At the time of his death, Uncle Charles occupied the chair of a well connected electrical institution. The ties that bound him to his position were strong indeed. His death came as an extreme shock. *


When it became evident that ex-Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s great-great uncle, Remus Rudd, spent time in prison from 1883 and eventually hanged for horse stealing and train robbery in Melbourne in 1889, Kevin Rudd’s staff sent back the following biographical sketch:

*“Remus Rudd was famous in Victoria during the mid to late 1800s. His business empire grew to include acquisition of valuable equestrian assets and intimate dealings with the Melbourne-Geelong Railroad..

Beginning in 1883, he devoted several years of his life to government service, finally taking leave to resume his dealings with the railroad.

In 1887, he was a key player in a vital investigation run by the Victoria Police Force. In 1889, Remus passed away during an important civic function held in his honour when the platform upon which he was standing collapsed."*