The Problem of Evil In Fiction

The two types of truth that Card describes are the illusion of truth and the substance of truth.  The illusion of truth is the idea that the reader can relate to truths the author presents because it is a truth that the reader has had some sort of experience with.  These are experiences that we can't deny to be a part of our lives.  These are facts that we know that no matter reality or fantasy, they will always be the case.  The substance of truth is the author's idea of what is true.  Regardless of whether it holds truth elsewhere, what is important is that the author believes it to be true.  As Card mentions, "what seems evil to one person may seem right and just to another." (pg 227).  This means that an author can not tell you, in a believable manner, that something is right when if fact, the author isn't a personal believer in the statement. 
I agree with Card's claim that it "is impossible for a writer to convincingly violate his own conscience in his fiction".  I think that if an author writes with only a partial conviction of the substance of truth, the reader will lose interest.  I think that it is within the writer's responsibility to have a sense of conviction when they are writing, and it is hard to write in conviction about something that you have doubts about. It's like a professor asking a student to believe in a concept that they, themselves, don't personally find to be true.  I think that not only is it impossible, but it doesn't do the story any justice to not have conviction behind it.  Why would the reader believe part of the story if there are other parts that seem to be unbelievable?  Why would the reader want to take the time to read something they didn't trust?  The main objective as a writer should be writing in truth so that the reader can follow the story in the integrity that they need. 
Word Count : 338