You Can't Twist the Fabric of Reality

This short segment of a Jordan Peterson talk is an excellent description of The Heart of The Moral Premise concept. "You Can't Twist the Fabric of Reality and Get Away with it."

Peterson's point is summarized by an adage I first heard from my good friend Dan Glovak (R.I.P). Dan reminded his daughter and my son of this before they married: 

You can make any choice you want,
but you have no control over the consequences. 

In my Moral Premise workshops I use this diagram, which I explain below.

The Decision Cycle in Pursuit of a Goal

A character (or real person, on the left) has a goal they want to achieve (the red star on the right). Typically the path to achieving the goal requires some sort of personal transformation.  In reality (Peterson's "fabric of reality") the transformation takes place through a long series of cycles through the following four steps.

1. VALUE. The person possess certain values and reside deep in their psyche. The person may consciously recognize and be able to articulate those values, or they may not. The values may be either righteous, good, banal, bad, or evil. Regardless, the values are  the inner motivations that control the person's decisions and actions. 

2. DECISION. When a person observes something outside themselves, such as the goal they want to achieve, or an anti-goal they want to avoid, their values kick into action. They may do this consciously or subconsciously, but they nonetheless evaluate, compare, and contrast what they observe (perhaps a behavior of a person or an event in the physical world) outside themselves to their motivational values. Depending on the strength of their values and the largeness or smallness of the observation, the person makes a decision to interact with the observation, or thing outside them. The person decides, perhaps, to change what they observe, or to come alongside it and encourage the behavior or presence of whatever it is. 

Both steps 1. and 2. occur inside a person's psyche. They are invisible. But they are real events that happen in the person's mind. 

3. ACTION. Based on numerous factors and conditions, the person translates their values and decisions into the physical realm and takes some action, which as just mentioned either attempts to change or encourage the outside observation....or path the person wants to take toward their goal or anti-goal. 

These first three steps are all within the control of the individual. 

But once step 3. ACTION occurs, the person is at the mercy of Natural Law, or the fabric of reality. 

4. CONSEQUENCE. For every action there is a re-action. It could be an opposite and equal action as we know about in the realm of physics. Or, in the psychological realm it could be an alignment or encouraging, reinforcing action. But either one is not for the individual to decide or control. The consequence is entirely regulated by Natural Law. It may be a law of  physics, like gravity—you can't step off a cliff without falling and hurting or killing yourself.  Or, it could be a law of human psychology. If you are disloyal to a friend, Natural Law indicates you have a good chance of losing that friendship. 

The result?

After the person experiences the Consequence (and depending on the severity of it or them), the person may adjust their values, hopefully driving them closer to an alignment with Natural Law (The Fabric of Reality), where they will find true peace and happiness. If the person is malleable in this way, given enough of the cycles through those four steps, Natural Law will nudge the person toward what is good, true, and beautiful...unless the person is particularly belligerent and meets a tragic end—the true villains among us. 

This diagram and explanation is all very nice, but it's missing the sizzle of Peterson's passion and insight.. 

How Invisible Moral Decisions Effect Visible Physical Plots

I'm helping a friend who has ALS write his memoir. He's a retired automotive design engineer who side-lined as arm-chair philosopher. For years he's been active on a few Internet forums that discuss politics, religion, philosophy, and language. He is always reminding people to "check your premise." 

Now he's not a story writer, so when he says "check your premise" he's not consciously referring to my book The Moral Premise, this blog, nor is he referring to writers crafting a story. 

Well, that's not exactly true. He IS referring to the person he's dialoguing with and the story they are writing about themselves with their life...in the same way a writer makes "life" decisions for a fictional character. 

In this idea of making moral decisions and checking your premise is the mechanical process that allows audiences to emotionally connect with fictional characters. The moral premises of our characters must accurately reflect how real people interact with the unchangeable laws of the universe. The laws of the universe include both physical and psychological laws—or metaphysical laws often referred to as spiritual and moral. Don't let anyone tell you naturally sourced spiritual and moral laws are relative. Governments can make laws and try to enforce them, but such "laws" are subject to the immutable laws of the universe and human nature. 

Back to my friend.

His advice to...

CHECK YOUR PREMISE...

lives alongside the concept that

REALITY DOES NOT AND CANNOT CONTRADICT ITSELF.

Neither can your characters live in contradiction to reality. But of course they try. That's the foundation of drama. A character can willfully walk off the edge of a 100-foot rocky cliff, as he attempts to force reality to contradict itself. But since reality does not and cannot contradict itself, your character falls to his death. 

In the same way, if a character lives by a moral premise that lying is a virtue (as some of our legislators believe) reality will catch up with them. Oh, for a time, a law that contracts reality may be passed and enforced, but eventually there will be a reckoning. Reality will have the last say.

When plotting out the physical beats of a story you must include in the plotting the moral premise (or the value system invisible in the character's head) for the character's physical actions. Mental decisions are part of the plot. Without the mental process you cannot have physical action. Of course, I'm assuming you're writing a story about a moral agent, a person who has the psychological will to act...either in cooperation with reality (natural law) or contrary to it. In every case, the internal, invisible decision, based on a motivating moral premise or value, will determine whether or not the physical consequences will bring pleasure or pain to your character. In order to connect with audiences that consequence must agree with reality. It cannot be in contradiction to reality. 

SUBTLE CONTRADICTIONS

Now, let's take this one level deeper into the sub-conscience, as Christopher Nolan (Inception) might do. Let's assume a character (like a person in real life) commits some contradiction to reality. He breaks a law, or commits a sin, or embraces some vice that is invisible to those around him. Yet it's not something brazen that will eventually be discovered is the physical realm, like an illegal pyramid scheme. Let's assume the contradiction (or vice) is entirely mental on the part of the character—envy, greed, lust, bitterness, hate, arrogance. Of course, any of these can easily be personified, and take the form of physical action. Your character participates in the mental game of envy, greed, lust, bitterness, hate, or arrogance because they believe (perhaps subconsciously) that harboring such thoughts will bring them pleasure. But reality does not allow pleasure to flow from vice. 

What happens is subtle. The character knows (consciously or subconsciously) that thoughts of envy, greed, etc. can lead to physical actions that others will quickly regard as wrong. This is where the age-old adage "what you think is what you are" comes into play. Such thoughts lead to guilt, and guilt leads to distraction, or perhaps evil thoughts lead to distraction first, and then guilt. Eventually, the character becomes obsessed with the thoughts and the potential ramifications that even without acting on the thoughts, other activities, even seemingly insignificant ones, like house keeping (making bed), hygiene (brushing teeth), and financial (no tips at a restaurant), lead to a lack of self-esteem, which leads to depression, which leads to some physical act that is seemingly totally unrelated to the original thoughts of envy, greed, etc. Perhaps it's an argument with the lawn service because the grass was cut too short. Perhaps your character drops a jug of milk and it spills all over the kitchen floor.  He's late for an appointment (due to multiple distractions that build up) and gets a ticket for speeding, and then argues with the cop and ends up in jail overnight. 

In this way even mental lapses with reality, and just thinking about living in contradiction with reality, can lead to a character's detriment. In this way a complex character can enter into a plot that may at first seem disjointed, until the real problem, a psychological, mental, moral, or spiritual mind set is revealed. 

CHECK YOUR CHARACTER'S PREMISE... 

...his moral values. Is he attempting to live in contradiction with reality, even if only inside his mind? Remember:

REALITY CANNOT CONTRADICT ITSELF. 

Only the government can contradict reality...although not for long. 

Jordan Peterson and the Moral Premise

I do not think Jordan Peterson has read or is even aware of the Moral Premise as a book. But of the concept and how application of the moral premise applies to life and to stories that connect with people he is an expert. In this interview (from 2018) he speaks to the connection of life and stories and the moral premise for about 2 minutes from about 24:00 to 26:40. 

The Story Logic of Things Not Seen

'The road to the Stars" in Bentley Kansas |
Photography by @jaxsonpohlmanphotography

How do you describe something incapable of being expressed in words...things that are ineffable?  The ineffability of ideas is what the storyteller must conquer daily. 

For most writers this comes instinctually. But a closer examination of ineffability can be revealing and improve our efficiency. 

Let's start with a story's theme...okay, okay, the story's moral premise...

Hostility leads to making enemies; but

Love leads to making friends.

With nothing more I'll bet you could come up with a story about that... or at least draft a log line. 

But could you do this? Could you describe for me the IDEA of hostility? or the IDEA of love?

No, I don't mean what hostility or love looks like when practiced in life (e.g. making enemies or making friends). The moral premise already tells you that. But what I mean is, can you describe the idea, the thought, the value? 

Ideas, thoughts and values are ineffable. That are not things we can sense with our six physical senses (sight, smell, touch, hear, taste or balance). The materialists among us would be tempted to say that such ineffable things don't exist, because ideas, thoughts, values or even God can't be sensed, at least with our  physical senses. But ideas, thoughts and values do affect us, and often physically. But where are they? Where do they exist? Can you point to them? See them coming?

As storytellers we know that ideas and insights exist. We rely on them for our physical reality, because it is the thought, the value, the idea that animates our lives and our characters. We might say it is the ineffable that are the first movers of who we are as humans. 

The mathematician can ponder a proof for years...and then suddenly the insight occurs and a solution reveals itself. Such insights have revolutionized civilization. Gravity, Pi, String Theory. While we can describe the resulting formula you can only describe the insight with words that express vague, rhapsodical terms that sound more like a religious experience.

But the insight is real.  Reality is found in the value that anchors a character's arc, that nails the conflict, that motivates action, and allows consequences to be physically experienced. And yet such reality, per se, is incapable of being seen. We CAN describe a character with a mustache sitting on a rock by the side of a road outside Bentley, Kansas at night starring at the Milky Way. But we CANNOT physically describe the value that put the character in that place, lost in his dreams. There you go, DREAMS. You can try to describe a dream, but they're really beyond explanation. You'd have to have been there.

So, what do we, as storytellers, do with the ineffable? Well, we have to treat them as real, as the absolute logic behind our stories. But they are invisible. So, we "struggle to find similes for what cannot be said directly..." we look for visual motifs that symbolize ideas, "personifying the forces of nature and hunting everywhere for metaphors and analogies." (W. R. Inge, Studies of English Mystics as quoted by D. Elton Trueblood in The Trustworthiness of Religious Experience. Friends United Press, Richmond, Indiana. 1939).

Are ineffable things real? Do they exist? The materialist or atheist, if they are to be consistent, would have to say, no. But stories cannot exist without the ineffable. Indeed civilization would not be very civilized without the reality of ideas, values, and insights. 

I hope you won't let the irony of this escape you. One of the first rules of storytelling is SHOW, DON'T TELL. But logic demands that our stories begin with and are motivated by what is not seen...the ineffability of ideas, values, and insight...that which make our stories connect with the reality of our readers and audiences. In fact, without the ineffability of these things, there would be nothing to see, smell, taste, hear, touch or run to or away from. Our lives, and our characters are only real (in a physical sense) because of the reality of the ineffable (that which is not seen).