A Theory of Knowledge

By Thomas A. Roll

This short, fictional murder-mystery begins with a concise presentation of one man's idea of what knowledge is; and it is this "red-herring" which becomes the main theme. It fosters controversy, greed, thought, and murder - but why? Be forwarned: this is not a book for those who cannot tolerate ambiguity. The author does not take responsibility for those whose world-view is obliterated. If your philosophical outlook of our world is fragile, DO NOT READ THIS BOOK!

• Language: English
• Publisher: BookBaby
• Release date: Jun 1, 2013
• ISBN: 9781626758803

Book preview

9781626758803

Chapter 1

Daniel Bellum was a happy guy. He had just read the ratings and he had the number one late night talk show emanating from the Midwest. It was now garnering national attention via podcasts and the satellite feeds airing delayed viewings of his live show.

He was looking forward to tonight’s show as he walked into the studio offices for the preliminary meeting with the production crew. Everything seemed good: the first guest being Robert Brashum, a good-looking young actor on tour promoting his latest film; then a local jazz-folk group just releasing their follow-up cd to a successful first release; a charity plug for a national breast cancer foundation...

What’s this? he said, pointing to the scheduled line-up.

That’s Frederick Llorat, explained Sally Keller, the talent coordinator, He’s responsible for publishing a short treatise in the Journal of Modern Philosophy called ‘A Theory of Knowledge’.

You’re puttin’ me on, responded Bellum, This is boring stuff. The audience will fall asleep.

Well, it seems to be generating a lot of controversy – especially between the religions and the sciences, she defended, and the Forever Young ensemble’s bus broke down in Cleveland and they won’t be able to make it until tomorrow.

How ‘bout I just call my mother up and she can talk about her recipes from my youth, Bellum said derisively, That would be just as exciting.

Just a moment, broke in Jack Redmon, the producer. Sally’s done a good job since she signed on. Remember the talking dog she got? You thought that was insane, but it became one of the highlights of the season.

Bellum cast a doubtful look over the production crew, Shoot me if I’m wrong, but I think this is ten minutes of dead air.

I’ve got faith in you, Redmon encouraged, You can turn ten minutes of dead air into a Cirque du Soleil.

Blowing sunshine up his ass always worked, so Daniel Bellum capitulated to ending his show with what he considered to be a go to the kitchen and get something to eat guest.

Oh well, he thought, even David Letterman had his boring on-air minutes.

Later in the evening he was sitting in front of the make-up mirror contemplating his monologue presentation and the various ways to keep the show moving along in case something stupid happened along the way. He stopped off at the green room to say a quick hello to his guests and then proceeded to the studio.

The audience liked his monologue, interspersed with clever ad-libbing. The show seemed to be going along smoothly, but he felt something was not quite right. He couldn’t put his finger on it, but something felt different; as if the audience demographics were not quite the same. Response was good, but different.

And now, ladies and gentleman, he began after a commercial break, "our next guest wrote an article in a respectable journal that seems to have attracted...

Boooooo! a single voice rang out in the audience, followed by some polite tittering.

Being caught off guard, Bellum ad-libbed. Whoa, whoa, whoa, now. Let’s cut the guy a little slack. I haven’t even introduced him yet.

Now being somewhat curious about his ‘boring’ guest, he announced, Ladies and gentleman, here’s Frederick Llorat.

There was a smattering of applause from the majority of the audience, and a resounding chorus of boos from a very small minority. The truth was, the only people who had even heard of the next guest were those who were booing. Daniel Bellum picked up on this instantly. He shook Llorat’s hand and had him sit down in the guest chair.

"You seem to have a small, but vociferously opposed following, Mr. Llorat... or is it Professor Llorat?

No, Freddie responded, I’m just a plain, old guy – and call me Freddie.

Plain and easy going, thought Bellum. He liked him right away, but before he could say anything, another verbal outcry came from the audience, this time in a foreign-sounding language.

Bellum turned in the direction of the audience, this time more serious.

Alright, he warned, Stop now or you’ll be escorted out.

Turning back to his guest he confessed, I must admit that I didn’t have a chance to read over your article. I only know, he parroted, that it has garnered some controversy between science and religion.

Freddie smiled and shook his head, All I know is that I proposed a unique theory of knowledge, and the next thing I know I’m being barraged by hate mail, receiving offers of prayers for me, being accused of being Satan incarnate, and...

That’s because you are, a voice shouted from the audience.

Bellum looked off camera to his producer, Jack, this can’t happen, get that guy out.

The audience was getting uneasy as there was obviously more than one person causing trouble. Jack Redmon sent for security while the interview continued.

Go on, urged Bellum, What’s a theory of knowledge?

Freddie cleared his voice, Well, there’s been many suggested, beginning with Plato, but they’ve all come up short until now.

That sounds a little pompous, don’t you think? interrupted Bellum.

On the surface, yes, conceded Freddie, but I can’t seem to find anyone who can logically critique it without invoking an indefinable entity – a god-like concept.

Hence the religious interest, interjected Bellum.

Right, said Freddie, "but the theory encompasses so much more. It’s somewhat like a philosophical ‘Theory of Everything’ – you know, that theory that physicists have been striving for which accounts for everything in the universe. Consequently.

3 I guess my theory has been interpreted by many theologians as an attack on religion because it undermines much of the philosophy that people of faith hold sacred"

At this point Bellum decided things were getting too deep for his audience, so he turned to the camera for a break. In doing so his side vision noticed two people were standing in the studio audience. Both started yelling epithets just as security was starting down the stairs. One was unintelligible as the other reached into his sweater vest, pulled out a small caliber pistol, and started shooting wildly in the general direction of Bellum and his guest.

Pandemonium broke out. Shrieks and screams and the crack of gunshots intermixed as the audience either dove for the floor or dashed for the exits. Jack Redmon had enough mind left to order the crew to shut down and run, but most just ran. Security attempted to grab the babbling man as a clean-cut looking young man dove down over two aisles and wrapped his arms around the man with the gun, forcing the gun to his side as they crashed down into the next aisle. In the process the shooter, who had fired off at least three rounds, kept pulling the trigger; only now, since his gun had been forced to his side, he shot himself in the foot. Security was immediately on the two and wrestled the gun from the shooter.

Jack Redmon glanced at the chaotic scene from his position at the foot of the stage area. He jumped to his feet to calm the studio (now half empty with most everyone still racing for the exits), when he looked over his shoulder to see Freddie Llorat kneeling over a grimacing David Bellum, who had blood flooding out of the right shoulder of his sports jacket.

CHAPTER 2

The next morning’s news shows were all the same: the headline that Daniel Bellum was shot during a live broadcast, the playing of the video until the feed was cut by the bedlam in the studio, and interviews with everybody involved. It was great copy, and the news people knew it.

Jack Redmon was the first interview. He thanked everyone for their prayers and concerns for Daniel, who was now recovering in ICU following a massive bleed which almost cost him his life. He went on to thank the brave, young man who literally flew through the air and wrapped his arms around the shooter. He understood that he was also in the same hospital with a broken arm and possible internal injuries (for which he was being observed).

The chief of police was questioned concerning the shooter, who was being held under armed guard at another hospital where he was having the self-inflicted bullet surgically removed from his foot. He released the names of the shooter, Allen Bradley, as well as the brave, young man, Nathaniel Perkins. Little was known about the two except that they apparently knew each other (according to Perkins) from attending the same church in town. Investigation into the reason behind the shooting was ongoing and there was no more information available at that time.

Freddie Llorat flipped off his TV with a sigh. He’d just gotten home after spending all night at the police station being interrogated. He just wanted to get some sleep. He flopped down on his bed and instantly went to sleep. He missed the next interview on the local news.

Kent Casper, a news reporter for 7-News, had tracked down someone who claimed to have an idea of the reason behind the shooting.

This is Dr. Steven Hockley, the newsman announced, noted astro-physicist and author of several popular science books. Thank you for agreeing to speak to me on such short notice.

No problem, my pleasure, replied Hockley, succinctly.

I understand you’re familiar with one Frederick Llorat, the man being interviewed by Daniel Bellum at the time of the shooting, questioned Casper.

Actually, replied Hockley, I’ve never met the man. I only just read his ‘Theory of Knowledge’ treatise a few days ago. It was so intriguing that when I heard he was going to be on Bellum’s show, I thought I’d watch it.

So you feel that this Frederick Llorat had something to do with the shooting? asked the newsman.

Only in that he’s responsible for the treatise, responded Hockley, It’s now pretty evident from what I saw on the show and heard from the news about the shooter that the shooting was the result of a religious fundamentalist reacting to what Llorat wrote.

That’s a pretty strong accusation, stated the newsman, "What did he write?"

"It’s just what the title says: ‘A Theory of Knowledge’. In my mind I think it is THE theory of knowledge. It defines what knowledge is and how it is derived. I cannot find a flaw in it. It’s short, concise, and succinct. It clarifies the mis-used term reality