presumably in contrast to logic or science, seen too susceptible to ulteriority, to special pleading and particularly to malice. Bruner argues that stories focus not on what is, but what could be or might be. I believe this to be true because to some We can
extent, although we can only live in the present.
forecast and predict what may occur in the future but all stories are derived from our past experiences. Story can prepare us for the unforeseen expectations of the future. Bruner makes several comparisons and correlations about law being similar to literary works. I believe that some of the
comparisons on how stories are formulated to be quite true based off his observations and references.
Bruner explores the challenging issues of self, whether it is something that exists within us or is in a constant state of creation. He states that there is no such thing as an essential
self, but something that is rather constructed as a narrative to meet the needs that we encounter. He lists many characteristics
that were derived from several psychologists and compares them to many characteristics of narrative. Bruner believes narrative
to be the essential means by which we express human aspirations and that stories are structured on what we experience. I
totally agree with this statement that all stories are based on individual life experiences; however, one must be open to prefabricated stories and whether the truth may or may not exist. Bruner concludes by discussing a couple different
features of language and how they tie together to form one relationship which constitutes narrative, a language within itself.