Today's History and Context lecture again looked at aspects of Bertrand Russell's History of Western Philosophy, particularly Locke, his theory of knowledge and his political philosophy. John Locke (1632-1704) lived a relatively long life, but main body of his influential works were published between 1687-1693. He was an apostle of the 1688 revolution and his father fought for Parliament during the English civil war. Russel considers Locke to be "the luckiest of all philosophers" because he completed his work in theoretical philosophy just as men came to power who shared his political opinions. It wasn't until after the revolution that he was able to take any part in English politics, and up until 1688 he spent his time composing his Essay Concerning Human Understanding.
Unlike Descartes, Locke believed that we are born with no innate thoughts - that everything we know is learnt. He suggested that all we have is the ability to reason. Nothing is built in, but what we do have is the capacity to learn. His religion played a massive role in his philosophies. He was a devout Christian and believed that much of what we know can come directly from God through revelation. Despite this he still chooses to analyse professed revelations with rational safeguards. - "Revelation must be judged by reason."
John Locke published his political philosophy in his two Treatises of Government. In the second, and most politically important of these treatises, Locke discussed his idea of the state of nature, and natural law. The state of the nature had already been considered by another highly regarded philosopher - Hobbes. They both gave their very different view of a world "antecedent to all human government". Hobbes believed that the people's dominant passions are aggressive - that without a hierarchical social system and defined rulers that humans would resort to violence and aggression to achieve personal gain. This meant that we needed strong rulers sent by God in order to save mankind from a state of constant war; an idea that matches with the Catholic belief in the Divine Right of Kings. John Locke was strongly opposed to this. He believed that in a state of nature, man would enjoy natural freedom and revert to natural law. That we already have a sense of what is right and what is wrong and would apply these moral senses were we given the chance.
Based on this, Locke proposed his Manual for a Revolution - a new concept of government. This hypothetical new government would have very limited powers, primarily to protect property. This would mean taxes could not be levied without the people's consent. Locke also believed that in this new system, people would have the natural right of revolution and would have the support to revolt if they believed that government weren't obeying natural law. Despite the hypothetical nature of this proposal, many of his theories regarding natural law and the natural right of revolution were used in the American Constitution almost a century after Locke had died.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Cameron's assault on the dependency culture
According to today's The Sunday Times, David Cameron is set to unveil a plan to get millions of Britons who claim welfare benefits back to work. The programme, similar to plans which already exist in America, focuses on people that have been unemployed for more than six months. This includes disabled people and single mothers, who would be forced to join training schemes or face a cut in their welfare payments.
The big idea is said to be the responsibility of Iain Duncan Smith, the former Torie leader, who is often considered the boldest thinker with regards to social justice. The scheme would see him fronting a committee in a future Conservative government although it is unclear as to whether he would become a cabinet minister or be given a senior role outside of cabinet.
Cameron's bold moves are designed to counter the Labour argument, which suggests that a new Torie government would repeat the errors of the 1980's recession and disregard the unemployed. It is the idea of Lord Freud, the Labour defector, who joined up with the Conservatives earlier this year (talk about jumping on the band-wagon!), and would mean that those on incapacity benefit would face rigorous medical checks and that anybody who refused to take a place on a training programme would face their payments being cut.
There are currently almost six million unemployed people claiming welfare benefits, but Cameron aims to drastically cut this number in the first four years of Torie government. He refuses to say exactly how much money the government would save on welfare payments, but he did say that he expects the scheme to "bring down the bill". - Let's hope so, it may even help to fill the financial chasm left by the 2012 Olympics, and the bank bail-out. It should certainly be an improvement on Labour's plans to raise the tax rate to 50% for those who earn £150k or more per year. An idea which could spark an exodus of up to 25,000 of Britain's big earners.
The big idea is said to be the responsibility of Iain Duncan Smith, the former Torie leader, who is often considered the boldest thinker with regards to social justice. The scheme would see him fronting a committee in a future Conservative government although it is unclear as to whether he would become a cabinet minister or be given a senior role outside of cabinet.
Cameron's bold moves are designed to counter the Labour argument, which suggests that a new Torie government would repeat the errors of the 1980's recession and disregard the unemployed. It is the idea of Lord Freud, the Labour defector, who joined up with the Conservatives earlier this year (talk about jumping on the band-wagon!), and would mean that those on incapacity benefit would face rigorous medical checks and that anybody who refused to take a place on a training programme would face their payments being cut.
There are currently almost six million unemployed people claiming welfare benefits, but Cameron aims to drastically cut this number in the first four years of Torie government. He refuses to say exactly how much money the government would save on welfare payments, but he did say that he expects the scheme to "bring down the bill". - Let's hope so, it may even help to fill the financial chasm left by the 2012 Olympics, and the bank bail-out. It should certainly be an improvement on Labour's plans to raise the tax rate to 50% for those who earn £150k or more per year. An idea which could spark an exodus of up to 25,000 of Britain's big earners.
Friday, October 2, 2009
The Dragon's Progress
On the 60th anniversary of the Communist revolution in China, their powerful role in the world was underlined yet again. The 2008 Beijing Olympics was an incredibly spectacular event. The opening ceremony alone cost an estimated US$100 million, featuring a cast of over 15,000 perfomers and lasted over four hours.
This year they were at it again. Celebrating six decades of Communist rule the Chinese held another remarkable spectacle: a parade featuring everything from women soldiers with mini-skirts and machine guns, to nuclear missiles and another spectacular firework display. Even the weather bowed down to communist supremacy. The forecast was for rain, but a gap opened in the cloud and President Hu Jintao's specatators were bathed in sunshine. Quite an impressive display from a country that was, thirty years ago, unable to feed it's entire population. Now they boast the world's third biggest economy. The Times today showed exactly how much Communist China has improved in the last sixty years. From 1949 to 2009 the average life expectancy has risen from 36.5 years to 73.5, the population has more than doubled up to 1.3 billion and the total grain output has gone from 113 milllion tonnes to 529 million tonnes.
Whoever said Communism was a bad thing?
This year they were at it again. Celebrating six decades of Communist rule the Chinese held another remarkable spectacle: a parade featuring everything from women soldiers with mini-skirts and machine guns, to nuclear missiles and another spectacular firework display. Even the weather bowed down to communist supremacy. The forecast was for rain, but a gap opened in the cloud and President Hu Jintao's specatators were bathed in sunshine. Quite an impressive display from a country that was, thirty years ago, unable to feed it's entire population. Now they boast the world's third biggest economy. The Times today showed exactly how much Communist China has improved in the last sixty years. From 1949 to 2009 the average life expectancy has risen from 36.5 years to 73.5, the population has more than doubled up to 1.3 billion and the total grain output has gone from 113 milllion tonnes to 529 million tonnes.
Whoever said Communism was a bad thing?
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
A man's best friend
According to today's Daily Telegraph honeybees could soon be used in the fight against terrorism. They have been trained to extend their proboscis when they detect explosives, just as they would do in the wild when gathering nectar for honey. Incentinel, the company behind the project based in Hertfordshire, thought that this trait could be used to fight terrorism. They condition the bees by giving them a reward of sugary water when they sense explosives. The bees are then placed in a "sniffer box", which holds thirty-six bees, and air from outside is sucked in. If explosives are detected the bees will extend their proboscis, and a signal will pass from the optical system inside the container to a computer.
The head of research and development at Incentinel, Mathilde Brians, claimed: "The advantage of bees over other animals is that they are really sensitive, cheap and are everywhere in the world". The device is not yet available, but is funded by the Home Office OSCT (Office for Security and Counter Terrorism), and the company say it has carried out successful tests alongside the government.
So, it looks like sniffer dogs may be about to be replaced by a slightly less cuddly companion.
The head of research and development at Incentinel, Mathilde Brians, claimed: "The advantage of bees over other animals is that they are really sensitive, cheap and are everywhere in the world". The device is not yet available, but is funded by the Home Office OSCT (Office for Security and Counter Terrorism), and the company say it has carried out successful tests alongside the government.
So, it looks like sniffer dogs may be about to be replaced by a slightly less cuddly companion.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
All trains are late. I am late. Therefore i am a train...
Today was my first lecture on the History and Context of Journalism (HCJ), so naturally we started by studying Bertrand Russell's History of Western Philosophy. During my pre-reading I found that i kept asking myself: "What does this have to do with Journalism?". The thought crossed my mind that this was a test - an elaborate hoax - designed to sort the milgramian obeyers from the intelligent, probing people who would know that you would never need a fifteen pound book on philosophy for studying journalism. Nonetheless i felt that the ignorant group better suited me, so happily parted with my cash at the university book shop (I say happily - it was perhaps more reluctantly with a hint of enthusiasm.). It turned out that I was right. Phew.
"So did the lecture itself answer any questions?" I hear my current total of zero subscribers cry with a boyish enthusiasm. Actually, no it didn't. But it was interesting, and I learnt a lot.
The most interesting point, for me at least, concerned Aristotle. Most people will know that he is one of the most important figures in western philosophy. Student of Plato and teacher of Alexander the Great, he wrote on many important areas: metaphysics, ethics, politics, logic and physics amongst many others. Coming at the end of the creative period in Greek thought (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle) he remained as unquestioned as the Church, and both in science and philosophy he was the greatest authority.
It was nearly two thousand years before any philosopher came around who could be regarded as his equal. This only came with "the new conceptions that science introduced". Galileo was one of those to challenge his authority. Aristotle explained, for example, that a cannonball would go up and then would come down. That one force would act on an object, then a second. Galileo proved beyond reasonable doubt that two or more forces can act on any single object at once. He realised that if one of Aristotle's theories could be disproved then perhaps so could others. The development of his famous telescope helped to further disprove Aristotelian theories, in particular, those which state the five elements and the heavenly spheres.
With Galileo's discoveries the floodgates opened. Interestingly, Newton was born on the same day Galileo died and seemed to be the next scientist who further disproved his theories. (Galileo was actually born on the day that Michelangelo died! - What are the chances?) Both Francis Bacon and Hobbes were great philosophers who were "virulently hostile" towards Aristotle's theory of syllogistic logic. They found it useless and unnecessary, and Hobbes even claimed that the years spent reading Aristotle's philosophy at Oxford were a waste of time.
Descartes, according to Russell, is the founding father of modern philosophy. His cogito: i think, therefore i am is still important today. His philosophy that mind is more certain than matter is the basis of many modern day philosophical theories. He states that "all things that we conceive very clearly and very distinctively are true". This effectively blew the majority of Aristotelian theory out of the water. Descartes claimed that he wanted to clear the debris of Aristotle and Catholic dogma, both of which had been seen as true for thousands of years until the arrival of the scientific advances and the great minds that came with it.
Aristotle was undoubtedly a great thinker. His ideas remained unchallenged for so long, that when he was finally disproved he became a joke amongst philosophers. Even though he'd been dead for nearly two millennia when he became a laughing stock, you can't help but feel sorry for the guy.
"So did the lecture itself answer any questions?" I hear my current total of zero subscribers cry with a boyish enthusiasm. Actually, no it didn't. But it was interesting, and I learnt a lot.
The most interesting point, for me at least, concerned Aristotle. Most people will know that he is one of the most important figures in western philosophy. Student of Plato and teacher of Alexander the Great, he wrote on many important areas: metaphysics, ethics, politics, logic and physics amongst many others. Coming at the end of the creative period in Greek thought (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle) he remained as unquestioned as the Church, and both in science and philosophy he was the greatest authority.
It was nearly two thousand years before any philosopher came around who could be regarded as his equal. This only came with "the new conceptions that science introduced". Galileo was one of those to challenge his authority. Aristotle explained, for example, that a cannonball would go up and then would come down. That one force would act on an object, then a second. Galileo proved beyond reasonable doubt that two or more forces can act on any single object at once. He realised that if one of Aristotle's theories could be disproved then perhaps so could others. The development of his famous telescope helped to further disprove Aristotelian theories, in particular, those which state the five elements and the heavenly spheres.
With Galileo's discoveries the floodgates opened. Interestingly, Newton was born on the same day Galileo died and seemed to be the next scientist who further disproved his theories. (Galileo was actually born on the day that Michelangelo died! - What are the chances?) Both Francis Bacon and Hobbes were great philosophers who were "virulently hostile" towards Aristotle's theory of syllogistic logic. They found it useless and unnecessary, and Hobbes even claimed that the years spent reading Aristotle's philosophy at Oxford were a waste of time.
Descartes, according to Russell, is the founding father of modern philosophy. His cogito: i think, therefore i am is still important today. His philosophy that mind is more certain than matter is the basis of many modern day philosophical theories. He states that "all things that we conceive very clearly and very distinctively are true". This effectively blew the majority of Aristotelian theory out of the water. Descartes claimed that he wanted to clear the debris of Aristotle and Catholic dogma, both of which had been seen as true for thousands of years until the arrival of the scientific advances and the great minds that came with it.
Aristotle was undoubtedly a great thinker. His ideas remained unchallenged for so long, that when he was finally disproved he became a joke amongst philosophers. Even though he'd been dead for nearly two millennia when he became a laughing stock, you can't help but feel sorry for the guy.
Hello
My name's Dan. I'm from Gravesend. Journalism and Law is my thing - apparently. It's good to finally meet you.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
