Tlonists would find Plato’s cave story more paradoxical than the story of the coins because the shadows to them would be just as real as the things the freed prisoner saw. The shadows would have existed at the same time and both only been the perception of what the man saw, not actually being any more or less real than the shadows. If I understood this portion of the reading correctly, the Tlonists’ views revolve solely around perception where each individual perception is no more correct than another’s so that the reality of the freed and the reality of the prisoners would both be equally real to them individually.
On the translation panel on Thursday, while I understand that the argument is correct in stating that two translations could have different meanings and still work, it seemed too obvious which would be the correct radical translation. I understand that it was exaggerated to highlight the possibility of different interpretations of another language, but even if a misinterpretation did exist, after learning enough of the other language it would be possible through trial and error and the correction of native speakers to learn the true meaning of each word. It seemed as though the lecture failed to acknowledge the fact that translation was done for the sake of passing understanding to the non speakers and not made to satisfy the exact meaning to the original speaker, meaning that whether the same message or tone is carried across is secondary to getting enough of the intended meaning across.