What light you shed on it
That was a lame opening. Let me try again.
Two totally different stories can still tell the exact same truth. Persuasion does not need to lie, does not need to resort to untruth to pull people in totally different directions.
Imagine a legal case: both sides use the exact same truths, the same facts. Both want to influence the descision into their direction. In an ideal world, both tell the truth. How can it be that they can drive so totally different goal by the same facts?
It's all in the light you shed on things. I am not going to mention the glass analogue here, as not to offer the 'ah I know what this about' escape route.
Think about it: take a simple fact, say about your father. Maybe something you like(d) or dislike(d) about him. Tell it with a certain intention. Try and tell two different stories, one with a pro-father stance and another with a 'my father is/was bad' stance. Use the exact same fact about your father for both stories!
If you try this out, you will be suprised how well this works. And the real trick is to use the same facts, and all of them in both versions! I'm not talking about 'selective truthfullness' or anything. No leaving off and quoting out of context. Just the way you tell the facts.
Examples might follow... just ask.
- What the Vorlons and the Shadows both missed
- when do you want something the most?
- little things we like but don't need
alles Bild, Text und Tonmaterial ist © Martin Spernau, Verwendung und Reproduktion erfordert die Zustimmung des Authors