On 4/12/02 11:16:00 AM, Amy Hall wrote:
>Tompkins suggests that truth
>is in the eye of the beholder
>pretty much, leaving it all
>relative. I think her
>conclusion is a cop-out. Just
>because she couldn't find the
>truth does not mean that there
>wasn't one
>When she says that "any one
>fact is perspectival doesn't
>change its factual nature in
>the slightest. It merely
>reiterates it. (688)" I have
>to disagree. If three people
>see a car accident happen,
>each from an alternate point
>of view, every account will
>likely be different. Fair
>enough, every person is giving
>"their truth" but just because
>it is true to them does not
>make it true. There is really
>only one thing that has
>happened, even if it cannot be
>completely reached. Every
>person will doubt what the
>other has said, because they
>saw their side with their own
>eyes. Their perspectives
>distort the truth, but the
>truth is still there. Every
>person distorts it in their
>own way.
>Tompkins conclusion is
>relatively unclear to me, but
>I do believe that I disagree.

I think everyone should get their own opportunity to form their own truth from her research. Even if she ended it by saying this is this and that is the truth it doesn't mean everyone would be happy because then everyone has doubts to what she would have concluded. There are many truths formed to this issue and I agree with the way it ended.