A Philosophical Inquiry into Reality, Meaning, and Human Experience

I. Introduction: Conceptualizing Reality Through Narrative

The human endeavor to comprehend existence is deeply intertwined with the act of storytelling. Individuals inherently understand themselves and their experiences through narrative structures, a tendency that reveals a fundamental human strategy for making sense of complex phenomena such as time, process, and change. 1 This conceptualization of the “world as narrative” extends beyond individual lives to encompass collective realities and societal structures, positing that narratives do not merely reflect an external reality but actively shape and imbue meaning into the perceived world.

This document will explore how diverse philosophical traditions have conceptualized the world as a narrative construct. It will examine the profound shift from traditional notions of objective truth to a recognition of narrative’s constitutive power, analyzing key contributions from Jean-François Lyotard, Walter R. Fisher, Hans Blumenberg, Juri Lotman, and Giambattista Vico. Furthermore, this inquiry extends to contemporary perspectives, including consciousness shifts, event ontology, and environmental narratives, to illustrate the enduring relevance and evolving applications of this philosophical lens. The central question guiding this exploration is: How do narratives, in their various forms, shape our understanding of reality and human experience?

II. The Foundational Shift: The Narrative Turn and Social Constructionism

The latter half of the 20th century witnessed a significant intellectual movement across the humanities and social sciences known as “the narrative turn.” 2 This development signifies a widespread recognition that stories hold profound importance in human understanding and social organization, encouraging the study of how meaning is constructed and derived from life stories. 3 This turn acknowledges that narrative is a fundamental human strategy for grappling with core elements of experience, offering an alternative to traditional scientific modes of explanation. 1 Postmodern philosophy, in particular, views narrative as a structure that constructs not only individual lives and identities but also subjectivity itself. 4

Complementing the narrative turn, social constructionism provides a theoretical framework for understanding how shared narratives shape perceived reality. This theory posits that much of what individuals perceive as “reality” is the outcome of a dynamic process of construction, heavily influenced by social conventions and language. 5 From this perspective, characteristics often assumed to be biological, such as race or gender, are understood as products of human interpretation shaped by cultural and historical contexts. 6 Language does not merely mirror an independent reality; it actively constitutes it. The terms used to understand the world are social artifacts, emerging from historically situated interchanges among people. 7

A crucial distinction, articulated by historian and philosopher Yuval Noah Harari, differentiates between objective reality and intersubjective reality. Objective reality consists of things that exist independently of human consciousness, such as gravity. In contrast, intersubjective realities are constructs that exist purely within the shared consciousness and communication of human beings. 8 Entities like money, nations, and human rights have no physical existence but derive their immense power from the collective belief in the stories that sustain them. 9 This unique human ability to create and maintain shared myths is a key to large-scale, flexible cooperation. 10 This distinction provides a firm grounding for social constructionism, suggesting that a substantial portion of our social and political world is, in fact, a narrative construct.

To further clarify this philosophical distinction, the following table delineates these concepts:

III. Deconstructing Grand Narratives: Jean-François Lyotard and The Postmodern Condition

Jean-François Lyotard famously defined the “postmodern condition” as an “incredulity towards metanarratives.” 11 Metanarratives, or grand narratives, are totalizing stories that claim to provide a comprehensive explanation for history and human experience, often with the goal of legitimizing knowledge, power structures, or a particular vision of human emancipation. 12 Examples include the Enlightenment narrative of progress through reason and Marxist narratives of class struggle.

Lyotard argued that in the postmodern era, these overarching narratives have become bankrupt, leading to a fragmentation of knowledge. 12 This skepticism towards universal truths results in an acceptance of a plurality of “small narratives” (petits récits) that compete with one another. 13 Technological advancements in communication and computer science contributed to this erosion, shifting the postindustrial economy toward linguistic and symbolic production. In this context, the pursuit of absolute truth is often supplanted by a focus on “performativity”—optimizing efficiency in service of capital or the state—which further undermines science’s claim as a modern metanarrative. 13

The implications of this shift are profound. While totalizing narratives can offer a unified and coherent understanding of reality, they also carry the significant risk of suppressing difference and diversity. Lyotard’s “incredulity” is a direct response to this suppressive potential. 12 This reveals a critical tension: the very mechanism that can create shared meaning risks totalitarianism. The rejection of grand narratives, while liberating, presents an ethical and political challenge. If universal truths are questioned, establishing common ground for critique and justice becomes difficult, necessitating a responsible relativism that avoids nihilism while establishing ethical foundations in a world of plural truths.

IV. Communication as Storytelling: Walter R. Fisher’s Narrative Paradigm

Walter R. Fisher’s Narrative Paradigm offers a foundational communication theory that reconceptualizes humankind as homo narrans, or storytelling beings. 14 The theory posits that all meaningful human communication occurs through storytelling or the reporting of events, and that a compelling story is often more persuasive than a purely logical argument. 15 This paradigm suggests that individuals perceive the world as a collection of stories and accept those that align with their existing values and beliefs. 16

Fisher developed his theory as an alternative to the “rational-world paradigm,” which holds that humans are primarily logical beings who base their decisions on evidence-based reasoning. 15 Instead of formal logic, Fisher proposed “narrative rationality,” which evaluates stories based on two principles:

• Narrative Coherence: The internal consistency of a story, including its logical flow and the reliability of its characters. 15

• Narrative Fidelity: The story’s “truthfulness” or reliability, assessed by comparing it with other stories and its resonance with the audience’s values and experiences. 15

Crucially, the persuasive power of a narrative is not diminished by the audience’s awareness that it may be fictional. 16 Its force resides in its capacity to resonate with human experience, not its strict factual accuracy. This perspective fundamentally re-evaluates how humans process information, suggesting that narratives are not merely a way of communicating but are the primary means for humans to make sense of the world. Fisher’s reconceptualization of humanity as homo narrans is not merely a communication model but a philosophical shift, reinforcing the broader narrative turn by providing a robust theoretical underpinning for its adoption across academic fields. 14

V. Shaping Worldviews Through Language: Hans Blumenberg’s Metaphorology

In his seminal work, Paradigms for a Metaphorology, Hans Blumenberg investigates the profound role of metaphors in philosophical language, arguing they are not merely rhetorical embellishments but deep indicators of an era’s underlying worldview. 17 He proposes the existence of “absolute metaphors,” which are fundamental cognitive structures that “cannot be translated back into conceptual language.” 18

Blumenberg posits that these absolute metaphors provide answers to “theoretically unanswerable questions whose relevance lies quite simply in the fact that they cannot be brushed aside, since we do not pose them ourselves but find them already posed in the ground of our existence.” 19 They “leap into a void that concepts are unable to fill,” offering a pre-conceptual framework for understanding reality. 19 This is a profound assertion: it suggests that fundamental aspects of our worldview are constructed not upon logical concepts but upon irreducible metaphorical structures. These metaphors are constitutive of our understanding, shaping thought in a way that precedes and enables conceptual articulation. 17 This perspective suggests a layer of narrative that is a powerful, and often unexamined, force in shaping how reality is perceived.

VI. The Semiotic Universe: Juri Lotman and the Semiosphere

Juri Lotman, a prominent semiotician of the Tartu-Moscow School, introduced the concept of the “semiosphere,” defined as the semiotic space necessary for the existence and functioning of languages and culture. 20 This concept functions as a comprehensive model for how culture operates, where all communicative processes unfold and new information is created. The semiosphere is not simply the sum of different semiotic systems but the prerequisite condition for any sign or text to generate meaning. It is not necessarily a geographical space but can be an abstract boundary, such as one separating “us” from “them” or one delineating a national culture or historical epoch.

Lotman’s work underscores the intricate relationship between language and culture, emphasizing how diverse cultural contexts shape the meaning derived from texts. A film, for example, exists within a broader network of cultural signs that influence its interpretation. Although Lotman described the semiosphere as a model, his own language is notably “full of spatial metaphors,” suggesting that even seemingly objective frameworks for reality are deeply rooted in metaphorical conceptualizations. This framework illustrates that culture is not just a container for stories, but is the very medium through which a society understands, constitutes, and perpetually redefines itself—a self-referential system where culture is created by, and in turn creates, culture.

VII. Myth, Poetic Wisdom, and Societal Structure: Giambattista Vico’s New Science

In his monumental work, The New Science, Giambattista Vico proposes a cyclical theory of history—corsi e ricorsi (cycles and counter-cycles)—in which civilizations develop through three recurring ages: the divine, the heroic, and the human. These stages are not merely chronological but are part of a recurring pattern of growth and decay.

Vico contends that early human understanding was based on “poetic wisdom.” He argues that “first, or vulgar, wisdom was poetic in nature,” rooted in metaphor and myth, which served as the primary means for early humans to comprehend natural and social phenomena. This “poetic theology” was a crucial stage in which the very foundations of society emerged from myth-driven narratives. This is a radical claim: it suggests that society is not primarily founded on rationality but on poetic and mythical modes of thought.

Vico posits a dialectical relationship among language, knowledge, and social structure. As societies evolve, so too does human nature, manifesting in corresponding changes in myths, laws, and economic systems. While the metaphors of the poetic age gradually give way to more formalized civic discourse and reason, Vico warns that an over-reliance on rationality can lead to a “barbarism of reflection,” causing civilization to decline and return to the poetic era. His cyclical view underscores the enduring necessity of myth and poetic narrative in shaping human societies, providing a deep historical and anthropological basis for the “world as narrative” concept.

VIII. Expanding the Narrative Lens: Contemporary Perspectives

A. Consciousness Shifts as Story-Shaped Phenomena: Jean Gebser

Philosopher Jean Gebser posited that human consciousness undergoes “mutations” through distinct “structures of consciousness” (archaic, magical, mythical, mental-rational, integral) that operate in parallel, rather than as linear stages. He argued against viewing these as a simple “evolution,” preferring to see them as discontinuous leaps. In the mythical structure, reality is apprehended through interconnected stories, symbolized by cyclical time. The emergence of the integral structure, which Gebser saw as a response to the crisis of the purely mental-rational world, enables a new, transparent relationship with time and space. This “aperspectival” consciousness is one of the whole, where all previous structures are recognized as co-present and can be lived through, rather than being subjected to them. This perspective suggests that the human mind is inherently narrative-producing, and that shifts in collective consciousness are fundamentally shifts in the dominant narratives through which reality is apprehended.

B. Philosophy of Events and Narrative Ontology

The philosophy of events challenges traditional views that prioritize static beings, instead proposing that reality is fundamentally composed of dynamic processes and unfolding events. This “process philosophy” offers a radical alternative for understanding the relationship between humanity and nature. The connection to narrative is explicit, as it is argued that “all meaningful communication occurs via storytelling or reporting of events.” 15 Events, while objective occurrences, acquire their significance and intelligibility only when integrated into a narrative framework. Narrative is therefore the primary mechanism through which the raw flux of events is transformed into a coherent and meaningful experience. This perspective extends to personal identity, where the “Narrative-self” paradigm suggests that a person’s identity is constituted by the stories they tell about their life, actions, and experiences.

C. Modern Biosphere and Environmental Narratives

Environmental narrative uses storytelling to convey the significance of the natural world, connecting people to nature on an emotional and intuitive level. The environmental humanities challenge the traditional dichotomy between humanity and nature, advocating for a collaborative and relational approach. This field critiques “scientism”—the doctrine that science alone reveals reality—and emphasizes that new, “more-than-human” narratives are needed to foster a sustainable and ethical relationship with the planet. This extends the “world as narrative” concept to a crucial contemporary challenge, suggesting that environmental crises are not just scientific problems but also failures of anthropocentric storytelling.

Recent work in environmental philosophy has further expanded this view by uncoupling agency from the purely human domain. This “non-human agency” recognizes that entities like ecosystems, animals, and even geological processes are active participants in shaping reality. Theoretical paradigms like new materialism and posthumanism aim to decenter the human and foreground human-nonhuman collectives. This fundamentally expands the concept of narrative, suggesting stories emerge from complex interactions between human and non-human actors, leading to a more ecological and interconnected understanding of reality.

IX. The Bigger Picture: Philosophy as Narrative – Synthesis and Implications

From Lyotard’s deconstruction of totalizing narratives to Fisher’s homo narrans, Blumenberg’s absolute metaphors, Lotman’s semiosphere, and Vico’s poetic wisdom, a consistent theme emerges: narrative is not merely a descriptive tool but a constitutive force in shaping reality. These thinkers, despite their varied foci, converge on the idea that human understanding, societal structures, and individual identity are fundamentally organized through narrative frameworks.

The conceptualization of philosophy as narrative carries significant implications:

• Epistemology: It challenges traditional notions of objective truth, suggesting that knowledge is often context-dependent and that understanding is achieved through narrative rationality (coherence and fidelity) as much as through formal logic. 12, 15

• Ethics: It necessitates a critical examination of who tells the stories, whose voices are suppressed, and how narratives can be re-authored to promote justice and inclusivity.

• Social Understanding: This perspective reveals that social realities are constructed and maintained through shared stories and opens new avenues for understanding agency, not merely as a human attribute but as a distributed property of human and non-human networks. 10

To provide a concise overview of the core contributions of the main philosophers discussed, the following table highlights their unique angles on the “world as narrative” concept:

X. Conclusion: Enduring Relevance and Future Directions

This document has demonstrated that the conceptualization of the world as a narrative construct is a multifaceted and profoundly influential philosophical idea. It reveals stories as active, constitutive forces in shaping reality, meaning, and human experience. From the deconstruction of grand narratives to the recognition of narrative as the fundamental mode of human communication, and from the pre-conceptual power of metaphor to humanity’s critical engagement with the planetary biosphere, a coherent philosophical trajectory emerges.

The “world as narrative” is not a fleeting intellectual trend but a foundational shift in how philosophical inquiry approaches questions of knowledge, being, and value. Potential avenues for further exploration are numerous. Future research could delve deeper into the neurological underpinnings of homo narrans or apply narrative theory to complex global challenges like climate change and social inequality to understand how dominant narratives are formed, contested, and transformed. The role of digital narratives and artificial intelligence in shaping perceived reality also represents fertile ground for inquiry. Ultimately, understanding the world as narrative empowers individuals not just to interpret but to critically engage with and potentially co-author the stories that define human existence.

Works Cited

1. Project Narrative. (n.d.). What is Narrative Theory? Ohio State University.

2. Hyvärinen, M. (2010). Revisiting the Narrative Turns. Life Writing, 7(1), 69–82.

3. Iegorova, A. V. (2020). From the Dawn of Narrative Studies to the ‘Narrative Turn’. Lviv Philological Journal, (7), 114-122.

4. He, Z. (2021). The Narrative Turn in the Study of International Relations. Francis Academic Press, 4(2), 1-6.

5. EBSCO. (n.d.). Sociological Theory: Social Constructionism.

6. Subramaniam, B. (2010). Social Constructionism. In Introduction to Women, Gender, Sexuality Studies. University of Massachusetts Amherst.

7. Gergen, K. J. (1985). The Social Constructionist Movement in Modern Psychology. American Psychologist, 40(3), 266–275.

8. Harari, Y. N. (2024, October 11). Three Levels of Reality: Yuval Noah Harari Explains [Video]. Berggruen Institute / YouTube.

9. Shortform. (2025, February 18). Intersubjective Reality: Yuval Noah Harari on Collective Belief.

10. LitCharts. (n.d.). Intersubjective Reality Term Analysis. LitCharts LLC.

11. Lyotard, J.-F. (1984). The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. University of Minnesota Press. (Original work published 1979)

12. Cetin, I. (n.d.). Jean-François Lyotard (1924—1998). Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

13. Literary Endeavour. (2018). Lyotard’s The Postmodern Condition: Issues of Knowledge and Legitimacy.

14. Fisher, W. R. (1987). Human Communication as Narration: Toward a Philosophy of Reason, Value, and Action. University of South Carolina Press.

15. Fisher, W. R. (1984). Narration as a human communication paradigm: The case of public moral argument. Communication Monographs, 51(1), 1-22.

16. Eaves, M. H., & Savoie, A. J. (2005). The Narrative Paradigm Theory. In SchoolUs.

17. Adams, D. (2011, August 23). Paradigms for a Metaphorology AND Care Crosses the River. Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews.

18. Blumenberg, H. (2010). Paradigms for a Metaphorology (R. Savage, Trans.). Cornell University Press.

19. Auerbach, D. (2022, September 25). Hans Blumenberg-Introduction To ‘Paradigm For A Metaphorology’. Via Hygeia.

20. Kull, K. (2019). A semiotic theory of life: Lotman’s principles of the universe of the mind. Green Letters, 23(3), 256-268.

21. Nöth, W. (2006). Yuri Lotman on metaphors and culture as self-referential semiospheres. Semiotica, 2006(161), 249-263.

22. Sarafraz, H., et al. (2017). A Study of the Yuri Lotman’s Semiosphere Cultural Theory and Its Application… Strategy for Culture, 10(39), 73-96.

23. Nöth, W. (2015). The topography of Yuri Lotman’s semiosphere. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 18(1), 9-21.

24. Vico, G. (n.d.). New Science. Goodreads.

25. Bookey. (2024, June 26). New Science Summary PDF.