Defining what is universal and what isn’t is largely philosophical in nature. Philosophy has been used throughout our history to try and explain both the material and ethereal world. Much as science attempts to use empirical data to explain and define the ways in which our world works. Philosophy uses human thought as a means of developing new theories and beliefs. One of the most interesting and fundamental philosophies was developed by Aristotle, an enormously renowned philosopher in his own right. Appropriately named, Representationalism is a theory that states that much of what we perceive is not in fact real, rather it is a representation of the fundamental idea of that perception. Simply stated, Representationalism proclaims that nothing we perceive is real. This philosophy humorously highlights the properties of the word universal. Our perspectives limit us in many ways, one of these ways essentially inhibits any belief from truly being universal (affecting all). Nonetheless universal doesn’t always refer to humanity as a whole, much like we have varying perspectives across the planet we also possess different …show more content…
As many cultures have different forms and iterations of literature, these writings allow us a small glimpse into the lives of the people of that specified culture. Yet, as Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie warns in her infamous TED talk The Danger of a Single story, literature and storytelling can be extremely harmful to our awareness of the world around us. Born into an intellectual family living in Nigeria, Adichie lived in literary atmosphere similar to that of most westerners. Meaning that she read almost exclusively European and American literature. Adichie began to write at a very young age, and while at the time it seemed normal, something was amiss within her writing. Looking back on her childhood Adichie admits that the content in her writings were about “…characters [who] were white and blue-eyed, [who] played in the snow, [and who] ate apples…” things that she had not actually grown up with. This perplexing phenomenon is referred to by Adichie as a “single story.” Adichie continues on to use this example to illustrate “…how impressionable and vulnerable we are in the face of a story…” This illustration was important to her thesis explaining how our cultural viewpoint changes the ways in which we think. Similar to the “Single Story” many of the ways through which we obtain knowledge are specifically catered to our societal and cultural needs. Still, these things presented to us are no less true than they