In psychology this week, we’ve been talking a lot about how we learn: intuition, personal experience, reason, and the scientific method. In psychology, science is, of course, the most important (who would take medication that ‘felt right’ or try some pill a friend whipped up in their kitchen and recommended saying ‘it cured my cancer’), but in writing, it’s the opposite.
|(Picture from: murphyboys.org)|
Writing is where your personal experiences should shine through. It’s highly based on reason, or imagination, starting with the thought of “what would happen if…?” and following a logical train of thought from there. Adding characters, changing events, and throwing in a bit of foreshadowing in places that “feel right” all sound like good uses of intuition to me. In my opinion, science is more about the average, and writing is more about the exception.
But, because stories don’t go through the scientific process and don’t become part of any formula, does that make them any less true? Is it possible that stories can “be true” to some people and not to others? I’d be interested to hear what you think on the matter.
And, just as a side note, I have over 50 followers now! Yay! I feel like Sheldon on the Big Bang Theory where he was more excited that he had 100 followers on twitter than that his girlfriend got an article on the cover of an important magazine. Thank you guys so much for being a part of this blog!