Tuesday 28 February 2012
Wednesday 22 February 2012
HCJ2 - Seminar 3.
As usual, this week's seminar followed on from what the lecture was about, which was Marxism.
Marxism is something I'm interested in and I enjoyed reading The Communist Manifesto, this is in 3 main parts, here's a short explanation of each part:
Part 1: Class struggle - Bourgeoisie v.s. Proletariat. This was started by the Transatlantic Triangular Trade (lord v.s slave) and the Industrial Revolution.
The proletariat make the goods that bring captial to the bourgeoisie.
Part 2: Communism - The main idea of communism to to abolish the private property of the bourgeoisie. Nationality should be abolished as well. Marx believed that a Utopian state could be created.
Part 3: Socialism - This is a stepping stone towards communism, this stage would be under the control of the dictatorship of the proletariat. As communism comes in, the proletariat dictatorship would wither way and communism would arise.
Alongside the three parts of the CM, here are what I think are the most important things in the Manifesto and these basically sum up Marxism.
1: The bourgeoisie forges the weapons that bring death to themselves and as the CM says, "it (the Bourgeoisie) has also called into existence the men who are to wield those weapons - the modern working class - the proletarians."
2: The bourgeoisie made another mistake by not buying new machinery for the proletariat to use, the proletariat had enough of having to use old and worn out machinery, so they formed Trade Unions that stood up for workers rights. These were the first step (according to Marx) towards a proletariat revolution.
3: Abolish private property. PP divides the working class from the bourgeoisie.
4: "For those of its members who work (proletariat), acquire nothing and those who acquire everything (bourgeoisie) do not work".
5: The 10 point plan. These are just the points that I see as most important:
- Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
- Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
- Equal obligation of all to work.
- Free education for all children in public schools.
One of Marx's other ideas is that of alienation. He said that the proletariat were being alienated, or to put it another way, separated from wider society. The problem for the proletariat is that they don't know it's happening, they're unaware of what the bourgeoisie is doing to them. According to Marx, the proletariat need to be conscious of their low position in society before they can start to revolt.
Finally, here are some quotes from Karl Marx:
"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."
"Landlords, like all other men, love to reap where they never sowed."
"Revolutions are the locomotives of history".
"The rich will do anything for the poor but get off their backs".
"Workers of the world unite".
TB 2012.
Marxism is something I'm interested in and I enjoyed reading The Communist Manifesto, this is in 3 main parts, here's a short explanation of each part:
Part 1: Class struggle - Bourgeoisie v.s. Proletariat. This was started by the Transatlantic Triangular Trade (lord v.s slave) and the Industrial Revolution.
The proletariat make the goods that bring captial to the bourgeoisie.
Part 2: Communism - The main idea of communism to to abolish the private property of the bourgeoisie. Nationality should be abolished as well. Marx believed that a Utopian state could be created.
Part 3: Socialism - This is a stepping stone towards communism, this stage would be under the control of the dictatorship of the proletariat. As communism comes in, the proletariat dictatorship would wither way and communism would arise.
Alongside the three parts of the CM, here are what I think are the most important things in the Manifesto and these basically sum up Marxism.
1: The bourgeoisie forges the weapons that bring death to themselves and as the CM says, "it (the Bourgeoisie) has also called into existence the men who are to wield those weapons - the modern working class - the proletarians."
2: The bourgeoisie made another mistake by not buying new machinery for the proletariat to use, the proletariat had enough of having to use old and worn out machinery, so they formed Trade Unions that stood up for workers rights. These were the first step (according to Marx) towards a proletariat revolution.
3: Abolish private property. PP divides the working class from the bourgeoisie.
4: "For those of its members who work (proletariat), acquire nothing and those who acquire everything (bourgeoisie) do not work".
5: The 10 point plan. These are just the points that I see as most important:
- Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
- Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
- Equal obligation of all to work.
- Free education for all children in public schools.
One of Marx's other ideas is that of alienation. He said that the proletariat were being alienated, or to put it another way, separated from wider society. The problem for the proletariat is that they don't know it's happening, they're unaware of what the bourgeoisie is doing to them. According to Marx, the proletariat need to be conscious of their low position in society before they can start to revolt.
Finally, here are some quotes from Karl Marx:
"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."
"Landlords, like all other men, love to reap where they never sowed."
"Revolutions are the locomotives of history".
"The rich will do anything for the poor but get off their backs".
"Workers of the world unite".
TB 2012.
WHU blog: An interesting evening for West Ham fans...
Tuesday evening's game against Blackpool shouldn't have been heart racing as it was, it should have been a simple 2-0 win for the Hammers, but as usual with West Ham it's never simple.
For almost all of the first half, West Ham were dominant, creating chances left, right and centre, they were rewarded with a goal from a free kick after 28 minutes and Nicky Maynard doubled the lead on the 32 minute mark. Things were going well for West Ham until Kevin Phillips scored for Blackpool and that looked like changing the game completley, Blackpool are a lot better in 2nd halves and the worry for West Ham must have been that if they didn't get the next goal, it could have been curtains.
The second half was quite boring until the 53rd minute when Robert Green fouled Blackpool player Roman Bednar outside the penalty area, thanks a lot Greeno. However, many teams would have capitualted if they went down to 10 men with an outfield player in goal, but this was no ordinary team - this was Sam Allardyce's West Ham United, a team who had played the majority of the last two games with 10 men.
After the sending off, Blackpool seemed to fall apart. It sounded as if they rushed to score an equaliser and ended up not really testing stand-in goalkeeper Henri Lansbury. Blackpool were fragile in defence as well and allowed West Ham to score two more goals to leave the final score 1-4.
West Ham's last 3 games sum up exactly why they're top of the league. Not many teams would be able to get 7 points out of 3 games in a row in which they had 10 men for all 3!
I now have no doubt that West Ham will be promoted automatically.
COME ON YOU IRONS!
TB 2012.
For almost all of the first half, West Ham were dominant, creating chances left, right and centre, they were rewarded with a goal from a free kick after 28 minutes and Nicky Maynard doubled the lead on the 32 minute mark. Things were going well for West Ham until Kevin Phillips scored for Blackpool and that looked like changing the game completley, Blackpool are a lot better in 2nd halves and the worry for West Ham must have been that if they didn't get the next goal, it could have been curtains.
The second half was quite boring until the 53rd minute when Robert Green fouled Blackpool player Roman Bednar outside the penalty area, thanks a lot Greeno. However, many teams would have capitualted if they went down to 10 men with an outfield player in goal, but this was no ordinary team - this was Sam Allardyce's West Ham United, a team who had played the majority of the last two games with 10 men.
After the sending off, Blackpool seemed to fall apart. It sounded as if they rushed to score an equaliser and ended up not really testing stand-in goalkeeper Henri Lansbury. Blackpool were fragile in defence as well and allowed West Ham to score two more goals to leave the final score 1-4.
West Ham's last 3 games sum up exactly why they're top of the league. Not many teams would be able to get 7 points out of 3 games in a row in which they had 10 men for all 3!
I now have no doubt that West Ham will be promoted automatically.
COME ON YOU IRONS!
TB 2012.
Friday 17 February 2012
Wednesday 15 February 2012
WHU blog: A deserved draw.
Last night's game at Upton Park was a tense affair, with both teams 'going for it' and showing masses of desire and spirit to try and win the game. Both teams played as well as each other and had genuine chances to score more goals than they actually did. How do I know this? I was there with my dad and my good mate Liam (a Southampton fan by the way) after he subjected me to St Marys and its inferior atmosphere earlier in the season at the reverse fixture between Southampton and West Ham.
Me and my dad were there cheering on a West Ham team who (in my opinion) played some of the best football they've played this season. Liam on the other hand was criticising the hopeless bubble machine at the side of the pitch and also criticising the referee (I'll come to him soon).
Southampton had more possession and more shots, but having both of those doesn't guarantee you more goals than your opponent. It's no secret that against a weaker team, Southampton would have scored at least 4 or 5 goals, but they weren't against a weaker team - they were against the team with the 4th best defence in the Championship. Tomkins, Faye and Reid were superb, they kept out what seemed like a million shots from the Saints and Rob Green made some great saves.
After 2 penalty appeals waved away by referee Lee Probert, West Ham were given a penalty after Billy Sharp fouled Mark Noble. however I didn't really see what followed. Apparentley, Matt Taylor (West Ham) punched Billy Sharp (Southamption) in the face, to be honest all I saw of the incident was Sharp going down like a sack of spuds holding his face. The referee then showed Taylor a red card. I can't be sure whether it was a punch in the face or a push in the chest. Mark Noble then converted the penalty, a great feeling at any time in a game but for Mark it must have been a special moment considering it was his 200th career match and that he was captain as well.
The rest of the first half was pretty much dominated by West Ham, with our best chance falling to Winston Reid, who had a clear shot on goal and skied it! During this half, the referee Lee Probert had an absolute shocker, as I mentioned before he missed 2 obvious penalties for West Ham he made poor decision after poor decison. You never want to see poor decisions from a referee, but waht I can't stand is when referees are inconsistent and Mr Probert was certainly that! In the second half, he judged that James Tomkins had fouled a Southampton player while both were going for a header, but before that, he didn't give a foul when a Southampton player did the exact same thing!
The second half was Southampton's, with very few West Ham chances. Adam Lallana was great (the sort of quality West Ham need!), however he couldn't find a way past the wall of claret and blue.
West Ham had to break at some point and they did when Jos Hooiveld slotted home an equaliser and that's when Southampton really came to life. They were all over West Ham but as usual, West Ham stayed strong and didn't concede.
West Ham player ratings:
Starting 11
Green: 9/10 -
Reid: 7/10
Tomkins: 8/10
Faye: 8/10
O'Brien: 6/10
Collison: 5/10 (subbed off after 21 mins)
Noble: 8/10
Faubert: 8/10
Taylor:4/10
Vaz Te: 8/10
Cole: 7/10
Subs
McCartney: 6/10
Lansbury: N/A
O'Neil: 6/10
Baldock: N/A
Maynard: 6/10
Come on you Irons!
TB 2012
Me and my dad were there cheering on a West Ham team who (in my opinion) played some of the best football they've played this season. Liam on the other hand was criticising the hopeless bubble machine at the side of the pitch and also criticising the referee (I'll come to him soon).
Southampton had more possession and more shots, but having both of those doesn't guarantee you more goals than your opponent. It's no secret that against a weaker team, Southampton would have scored at least 4 or 5 goals, but they weren't against a weaker team - they were against the team with the 4th best defence in the Championship. Tomkins, Faye and Reid were superb, they kept out what seemed like a million shots from the Saints and Rob Green made some great saves.
After 2 penalty appeals waved away by referee Lee Probert, West Ham were given a penalty after Billy Sharp fouled Mark Noble. however I didn't really see what followed. Apparentley, Matt Taylor (West Ham) punched Billy Sharp (Southamption) in the face, to be honest all I saw of the incident was Sharp going down like a sack of spuds holding his face. The referee then showed Taylor a red card. I can't be sure whether it was a punch in the face or a push in the chest. Mark Noble then converted the penalty, a great feeling at any time in a game but for Mark it must have been a special moment considering it was his 200th career match and that he was captain as well.
The rest of the first half was pretty much dominated by West Ham, with our best chance falling to Winston Reid, who had a clear shot on goal and skied it! During this half, the referee Lee Probert had an absolute shocker, as I mentioned before he missed 2 obvious penalties for West Ham he made poor decision after poor decison. You never want to see poor decisions from a referee, but waht I can't stand is when referees are inconsistent and Mr Probert was certainly that! In the second half, he judged that James Tomkins had fouled a Southampton player while both were going for a header, but before that, he didn't give a foul when a Southampton player did the exact same thing!
The second half was Southampton's, with very few West Ham chances. Adam Lallana was great (the sort of quality West Ham need!), however he couldn't find a way past the wall of claret and blue.
West Ham had to break at some point and they did when Jos Hooiveld slotted home an equaliser and that's when Southampton really came to life. They were all over West Ham but as usual, West Ham stayed strong and didn't concede.
West Ham player ratings:
Starting 11
Green: 9/10 -
Reid: 7/10
Tomkins: 8/10
Faye: 8/10
O'Brien: 6/10
Collison: 5/10 (subbed off after 21 mins)
Noble: 8/10
Faubert: 8/10
Taylor:4/10
Vaz Te: 8/10
Cole: 7/10
Subs
McCartney: 6/10
Lansbury: N/A
O'Neil: 6/10
Baldock: N/A
Maynard: 6/10
Come on you Irons!
TB 2012
HCJ2 - Come the Revolution!
As you can probably guess from the title, this post will be about revolution, more specifically Karl Marx and the revolution he envisaged.
First of all, I'll begin with a bit about Karl Marx himself.
He studied law, philosophy and then revolution.
He published the Communist Manifesto in 1848 along with Frederich Engels. Karl Marx was actually a journalist and editor of radical newspapers in Europe. He fled to London after publishing the CM and lived there until his death in 1883.
Although he started off as quite conservative (probably because of his father) but turned into a radical and began to publish his ideas, I think that his ideas can be summed up by a quote from him on his tombstone - "Workers of the world unite".
Marx's ideas
He believed that a society could be explained if you analysed economic factors and how they changed religion, legal and political processes.
He was technological deterministic - this means that he thought that technology drives change in society, instead of society driving technology.
Marx achieved a mixture of 3 key ideas:
1: Hegelian philosophy (especially history).
2: British empiricism (especially Smith).
3: French Revolution politics.
He worked through masses of data at tried to make socialism and the study of society in general scientific.
Marx saw the real struggle being class struggle, this can be seen across history e.g. lord and serf and Marx's concept of Bourgeoisie v.s. Proletariat. Marx was most definitely on the side of the Proletariat.
According to Marx, the Proletariat had "nothing to lose but their chains", they had everything to gain and the world to win. However, alienation (separation from society) was stopping the Proletariat fighting their suppression and the main cause is capitalism.
Work is the loss of the self and doesn't develop mind or body. The Bourgeoisie own the factories and places where the Proletariat work. "It has converted lawyer, the priest, the poet, the man of science, into its paid wage labourers".
COMMUNISM
Thesis: Capitalism and the liberal state.
Antithesis: The Proletariat
Synthesis: SOCIALISM
According to Marx, Capitalism seeds its own destruction, here's an example: A worker who makes tables in a factory earns £5 a week, these tables are then sold by the factory owner for £10 (thus making £5 profit), the worker who made the tables can't afford to buy one.
There will a violent revolution (for Marx, violence was the only way to achieve anything), the Proletariat will rise up and dispossess the Bourgeoisie of power and influence - society would be under the dictatorship of the Proletariat.
No government would be needed and it would simply wither away, this is when full-on Communism would come into being.
An example (quoted by Horrie) is from the song Imagine by John Lennon "Imagine there's no countries...no religion...Imagine no possessions".
A famous quote from Karl Marx (it also forms a basic Socialist principle) "From each according to their ability, to each according to their need". There would be no different levels/classes in society, it would just be one classless utopia.
TB 2012
First of all, I'll begin with a bit about Karl Marx himself.
He studied law, philosophy and then revolution.
He published the Communist Manifesto in 1848 along with Frederich Engels. Karl Marx was actually a journalist and editor of radical newspapers in Europe. He fled to London after publishing the CM and lived there until his death in 1883.
Although he started off as quite conservative (probably because of his father) but turned into a radical and began to publish his ideas, I think that his ideas can be summed up by a quote from him on his tombstone - "Workers of the world unite".
Marx's ideas
He believed that a society could be explained if you analysed economic factors and how they changed religion, legal and political processes.
He was technological deterministic - this means that he thought that technology drives change in society, instead of society driving technology.
Marx achieved a mixture of 3 key ideas:
1: Hegelian philosophy (especially history).
2: British empiricism (especially Smith).
3: French Revolution politics.
He worked through masses of data at tried to make socialism and the study of society in general scientific.
Marx saw the real struggle being class struggle, this can be seen across history e.g. lord and serf and Marx's concept of Bourgeoisie v.s. Proletariat. Marx was most definitely on the side of the Proletariat.
According to Marx, the Proletariat had "nothing to lose but their chains", they had everything to gain and the world to win. However, alienation (separation from society) was stopping the Proletariat fighting their suppression and the main cause is capitalism.
Work is the loss of the self and doesn't develop mind or body. The Bourgeoisie own the factories and places where the Proletariat work. "It has converted lawyer, the priest, the poet, the man of science, into its paid wage labourers".
COMMUNISM
Thesis: Capitalism and the liberal state.
Antithesis: The Proletariat
Synthesis: SOCIALISM
According to Marx, Capitalism seeds its own destruction, here's an example: A worker who makes tables in a factory earns £5 a week, these tables are then sold by the factory owner for £10 (thus making £5 profit), the worker who made the tables can't afford to buy one.
There will a violent revolution (for Marx, violence was the only way to achieve anything), the Proletariat will rise up and dispossess the Bourgeoisie of power and influence - society would be under the dictatorship of the Proletariat.
No government would be needed and it would simply wither away, this is when full-on Communism would come into being.
An example (quoted by Horrie) is from the song Imagine by John Lennon "Imagine there's no countries...no religion...Imagine no possessions".
A famous quote from Karl Marx (it also forms a basic Socialist principle) "From each according to their ability, to each according to their need". There would be no different levels/classes in society, it would just be one classless utopia.
TB 2012
Monday 13 February 2012
Friday 10 February 2012
Andrew Napier from the Daily Echo and Hampshire Chronicle.
On Thursday, a journalist called Andrew Napier came in to talk to us about reporting council meetings and other journalism lark, he said some interesting things and gave us some helpful tips.
Although there are no 'hard and fast rules' on getting news stories, Andrew gave us a few pointers:
1: Make calls - you won't get anywhere in Journalism if you don't make calls, this doesn't just apply to gathering stories, but also for checking your facts.
2: Go and see people - according to Andrew, stories about journalists sitting behind their desks all day is rubbish, journalists regularly go out and talk to people and make news stories from what they've heard, a journalist may go and see Police officers, fire fighters and councillors in one day. An important tip when trying see Police officers is to go directly to the plods, don't go through Press Officers as they will usually try and confuse you enough so you put the phone down and stop bothering them from their 'busy' days. However, be wary when talking to people like the Police and councillors, as they might try and lie to you.
3: Go to council meetings - nearly all council meetings are open to the public, which means that a Journalist can go along as well. These can be a great source of information, as Andrew Napier proved when he got 8 stories (spread across the Daily Echo and Hampshire Chronicle) from the Winchester Town Forum on 25th January.
4: Read press releases - these can be a major source of information for Journalists, however these can conceal information that may be a lot more interesting than the press release itself, so you should read the whole press release.
5: Be prepared to hear out for information - listening to people's conversations might seem rude, but it can be an extra source of information, not necessarily for getting a story, but for gathering extra information that can be used in a story.
6: Read newspapers! - obvious isn't it? Reading newspapers will help you get ideas for stories, but don't just copy a story you've seen in a newspaper though
Andrew also gave us some useful advice when starting out as journalists:
1: Try and get better at shorthand - Journalists are more employable if they have good shorthand, you might not get a job because of it.
2: Do freelance work - freelancing can be a good way to get started as a newspaper/magazine might like your work and offer you a job.
3: Try and get on a graduate training scheme - the BBC and newspapers run journalism training courses, you may be offered a job at the end.
4: Avoid national newspapers at first - national newspapers can treat their staff 'like slaves', it might be a good idea to avoid national newspapers for a few years, or don't if you want to be treated like a slave!
TB 2012
Although there are no 'hard and fast rules' on getting news stories, Andrew gave us a few pointers:
1: Make calls - you won't get anywhere in Journalism if you don't make calls, this doesn't just apply to gathering stories, but also for checking your facts.
2: Go and see people - according to Andrew, stories about journalists sitting behind their desks all day is rubbish, journalists regularly go out and talk to people and make news stories from what they've heard, a journalist may go and see Police officers, fire fighters and councillors in one day. An important tip when trying see Police officers is to go directly to the plods, don't go through Press Officers as they will usually try and confuse you enough so you put the phone down and stop bothering them from their 'busy' days. However, be wary when talking to people like the Police and councillors, as they might try and lie to you.
3: Go to council meetings - nearly all council meetings are open to the public, which means that a Journalist can go along as well. These can be a great source of information, as Andrew Napier proved when he got 8 stories (spread across the Daily Echo and Hampshire Chronicle) from the Winchester Town Forum on 25th January.
4: Read press releases - these can be a major source of information for Journalists, however these can conceal information that may be a lot more interesting than the press release itself, so you should read the whole press release.
5: Be prepared to hear out for information - listening to people's conversations might seem rude, but it can be an extra source of information, not necessarily for getting a story, but for gathering extra information that can be used in a story.
6: Read newspapers! - obvious isn't it? Reading newspapers will help you get ideas for stories, but don't just copy a story you've seen in a newspaper though
Andrew also gave us some useful advice when starting out as journalists:
1: Try and get better at shorthand - Journalists are more employable if they have good shorthand, you might not get a job because of it.
2: Do freelance work - freelancing can be a good way to get started as a newspaper/magazine might like your work and offer you a job.
3: Try and get on a graduate training scheme - the BBC and newspapers run journalism training courses, you may be offered a job at the end.
4: Avoid national newspapers at first - national newspapers can treat their staff 'like slaves', it might be a good idea to avoid national newspapers for a few years, or don't if you want to be treated like a slave!
TB 2012
Thursday 9 February 2012
HCJ2 - Seminar 2.
After being quite confused about Kant and Hegel, I was hoping that the seminar would help me figure out what they were going on about (especially Hegel). I may have sat through the seminar with a gormless look on my face, but the seminar definitely helped me to get my head round the content, especially as Nadine's seminar paper was so good.
First of all, let's start with Kant:
In Kant's 'Critique of Pure Reason', he explains the difference between Hume's a priori and his own. Hume said that a priori is a proposition that can't be denied without contradiction e.g. 'a circle isn't round'. However, Kant's a priori is a proposition that can be 'figured out' with reference to an experience but is not true by definition e.g. 'all physical objects have some weight' - this is called 'scientific knowledge' and called 'synthetic a priori' by Kant.
'The synthetic a priori proof of the reality of space and time'.
Space and time are necessary pre-conditions for existence, nothing could exist that does not exist. God is the only thing that could exist out of time and space, Kant moved into agnosticism.
Kant puts together Hume's empiricism and Descartes rationalism. Kant said that the world is both a mental phenomena and a 'thing' in itself.
Phenomena is the object in your mind, what you personally see.
Noumena is the real 'unpercieved' object.
This is called the Copernican revolution in philosophy. Previously it was assumed that objects (created by God or having a first cause) that existed 'unpercieved' and the mind was needed to represent the object to the mind itself.
Kant says "Instead of asking how our knowledge can conform to objects, we must start from the supposition that objects conform to our knowledge". Knowledge = a priori + a posteriori, as well as categories of possible ideas.
After the 'easy' bit, let's go onto Hegel:
According to Hegel, nothing is completely real except for the whole/absolute and only the parts that relate to the absolute are 'true'.
In every age, one nation is responsible for carrying the rest of the world through into the next age.
Society should be organic and people must be forced to be free. Until the Organic Society comes about, all states must be judged against it.
Everyone should be ruled under the control of a Totalitarian state, similar to that of the Prussian state in the 19th century. It would be irrational to disobey the Organic State.
Hegelians believe that holidays are unnecessary because the state that people live in is perfect anyway, so why would you want to go away from that?
TB 2012
First of all, let's start with Kant:
In Kant's 'Critique of Pure Reason', he explains the difference between Hume's a priori and his own. Hume said that a priori is a proposition that can't be denied without contradiction e.g. 'a circle isn't round'. However, Kant's a priori is a proposition that can be 'figured out' with reference to an experience but is not true by definition e.g. 'all physical objects have some weight' - this is called 'scientific knowledge' and called 'synthetic a priori' by Kant.
'The synthetic a priori proof of the reality of space and time'.
Space and time are necessary pre-conditions for existence, nothing could exist that does not exist. God is the only thing that could exist out of time and space, Kant moved into agnosticism.
Kant puts together Hume's empiricism and Descartes rationalism. Kant said that the world is both a mental phenomena and a 'thing' in itself.
Phenomena is the object in your mind, what you personally see.
Noumena is the real 'unpercieved' object.
This is called the Copernican revolution in philosophy. Previously it was assumed that objects (created by God or having a first cause) that existed 'unpercieved' and the mind was needed to represent the object to the mind itself.
Kant says "Instead of asking how our knowledge can conform to objects, we must start from the supposition that objects conform to our knowledge". Knowledge = a priori + a posteriori, as well as categories of possible ideas.
After the 'easy' bit, let's go onto Hegel:
According to Hegel, nothing is completely real except for the whole/absolute and only the parts that relate to the absolute are 'true'.
In every age, one nation is responsible for carrying the rest of the world through into the next age.
Society should be organic and people must be forced to be free. Until the Organic Society comes about, all states must be judged against it.
Everyone should be ruled under the control of a Totalitarian state, similar to that of the Prussian state in the 19th century. It would be irrational to disobey the Organic State.
Hegelians believe that holidays are unnecessary because the state that people live in is perfect anyway, so why would you want to go away from that?
TB 2012
Saturday 4 February 2012
WHU blog: Best win of the season?
West Ham's performance against Millwall was certainly impressive, for any team to play over 80 minutes without their captain is always a test of a team's 'character', but to win without your captain against your biggest rivals is fantastic.
According to the rule book, Kevin Nolan should have been sent off - no question, but sometimes referees need to use common sense. To send off a player not even 10 minutes into a local derby is ridiculous, I know people will say that Nolan went in with two feet on Jack Smith, but there was no malice involved, just a player overcome by the emotion of the game and a rush of blood to the head. This is similar to Vincent Kompany's tackle in the FA Cup 3rd round match against Man Utd on Nani, that time it was ruled that Kompany showed excessive force, but he won the ball. Both decisions required some common sense from the two referees but of course, there's nothing in the rule book about that.
I thought West Ham's performance today was great, they showed immense team spirit and played well, they created chances but (as usual) failed to convert most of them. That's why Ricardo Vaz Te and Nicky Maynard have been brought in - to score goals. If we're going to win promotion, we need to be scoring more goals and Vaz Te and Maynard will certainly do that. West Ham have only scored 1.6 goals per game and that's not enough for a team pushing for promotion, however our defensive record this season has been good, so if we can start scoring more we'll be set for promotion.
Come on you Irons!
TB 2012
According to the rule book, Kevin Nolan should have been sent off - no question, but sometimes referees need to use common sense. To send off a player not even 10 minutes into a local derby is ridiculous, I know people will say that Nolan went in with two feet on Jack Smith, but there was no malice involved, just a player overcome by the emotion of the game and a rush of blood to the head. This is similar to Vincent Kompany's tackle in the FA Cup 3rd round match against Man Utd on Nani, that time it was ruled that Kompany showed excessive force, but he won the ball. Both decisions required some common sense from the two referees but of course, there's nothing in the rule book about that.
I thought West Ham's performance today was great, they showed immense team spirit and played well, they created chances but (as usual) failed to convert most of them. That's why Ricardo Vaz Te and Nicky Maynard have been brought in - to score goals. If we're going to win promotion, we need to be scoring more goals and Vaz Te and Maynard will certainly do that. West Ham have only scored 1.6 goals per game and that's not enough for a team pushing for promotion, however our defensive record this season has been good, so if we can start scoring more we'll be set for promotion.
Come on you Irons!
TB 2012
Friday 3 February 2012
Radio - Successful interviews.
Here is a 'cut out and keep' guide on how to conduct successful radio interviews.
The two most important things to remember are:
1: Know how to use the equipment.
2: Ask good questions.
There are other things you should do for conducting succesful radio interviews.
1: Make sure the equipment is recording.
2: Make sure the equipment has enough power and if unsure, take spare batteries.
3: Don't move the microphone too much - this will distort the recording.
4: If using a Marantz, plug the microphone in the correct socket.
5: Don't keeping pausing the recording, the 'nothingness' can be edited out.
6: A quiet room isn't always the best place to record - you may want some background noises.
7: Avoid rooms with echo, although you may want it sometimes.
8: Avoid heavy traffic noises.
9: Try to shelter the microphone from the wind e.g. try and use a fluffy microphone.
10: Hold the microphone close to the interviewee and yourself when it's noisy in background.
11: Interviews should seem like unscripted chats.
12: Listen to the answers given.
13: Ask simple questions.
14: Avoid closed questions.
15: Nod during an interview, don't speak - this could ruin the interview.
16: Do research before interview.
17: Be polite and stay in control of the interview
TB 2012
The two most important things to remember are:
1: Know how to use the equipment.
2: Ask good questions.
There are other things you should do for conducting succesful radio interviews.
1: Make sure the equipment is recording.
2: Make sure the equipment has enough power and if unsure, take spare batteries.
3: Don't move the microphone too much - this will distort the recording.
4: If using a Marantz, plug the microphone in the correct socket.
5: Don't keeping pausing the recording, the 'nothingness' can be edited out.
6: A quiet room isn't always the best place to record - you may want some background noises.
7: Avoid rooms with echo, although you may want it sometimes.
8: Avoid heavy traffic noises.
9: Try to shelter the microphone from the wind e.g. try and use a fluffy microphone.
10: Hold the microphone close to the interviewee and yourself when it's noisy in background.
11: Interviews should seem like unscripted chats.
12: Listen to the answers given.
13: Ask simple questions.
14: Avoid closed questions.
15: Nod during an interview, don't speak - this could ruin the interview.
16: Do research before interview.
17: Be polite and stay in control of the interview
TB 2012
Public Affairs/Politics - Session 1.
This new module will cover Radio and TV as well as focus on Public Affairs - this will cover local government, central government and community politics.
Politics is an area I became interested in during the 2010 General Election campaign.
Here's just a short introduction into the module...
Steve Brine is the MP for Winchester and he represents the area in Parliament, this means that he has no power in the area's council and he is separate from the courts as well.
Councils - there are 3 types of councils in the UK.
County - The top level of councils and have control of whole counties e.g. Hampshire, the HCC controls a budget of £1.8 billion and has 40,000 staff, 53 libraries and 8 country parks. It is one of the biggest county councils in the UK.
City/District - Smaller than a county council and usually covers a large area in the county e.g. Winchester, WCC controls a budget of £12 million.
Parish - These don't usually have control of any money, but they debate issues that concern their specific area in small public meetings - much similar to the Town Forum we went to.
Smaller cities like Southampton and Portsmouth have Unitary Authorities, these are county and city councils in one.
Councillors - These are elected and can have a cabinet if their party is selected in the election. They are responsible for decision making in their area.
Council meetings - These meetings are public meetings that anyone can attend and are in the Public Interest. Whatever is said in these meetings can be reported, journalists can use the Defamation Act to ward off any councillors who say that the meeting is 'private'.
Council Tax - This is paid by residents of an area and funds public services such as hospitals, major roads and council housing. Generally, only about 1/4 of council funding is from council tax, other taxes make up the other 3/4.
TB 2012
Politics is an area I became interested in during the 2010 General Election campaign.
Here's just a short introduction into the module...
Steve Brine is the MP for Winchester and he represents the area in Parliament, this means that he has no power in the area's council and he is separate from the courts as well.
Councils - there are 3 types of councils in the UK.
County - The top level of councils and have control of whole counties e.g. Hampshire, the HCC controls a budget of £1.8 billion and has 40,000 staff, 53 libraries and 8 country parks. It is one of the biggest county councils in the UK.
City/District - Smaller than a county council and usually covers a large area in the county e.g. Winchester, WCC controls a budget of £12 million.
Parish - These don't usually have control of any money, but they debate issues that concern their specific area in small public meetings - much similar to the Town Forum we went to.
Smaller cities like Southampton and Portsmouth have Unitary Authorities, these are county and city councils in one.
Councillors - These are elected and can have a cabinet if their party is selected in the election. They are responsible for decision making in their area.
Council meetings - These meetings are public meetings that anyone can attend and are in the Public Interest. Whatever is said in these meetings can be reported, journalists can use the Defamation Act to ward off any councillors who say that the meeting is 'private'.
Council Tax - This is paid by residents of an area and funds public services such as hospitals, major roads and council housing. Generally, only about 1/4 of council funding is from council tax, other taxes make up the other 3/4.
TB 2012
Wednesday 1 February 2012
HCJ2 - Kant and Hegel
Tuesday's lecture was about the German philosophers Kant and Hegel. They both have complicated, mind boggling ideas, I'll try and explain them the best I can!
Kant
The Critique of Pure Reason
Kant's book The Critique of Pure Reason criticised empiricists and empirical ideas. Kant said that none of our knowledge comes from experience, our knowledge is 'a priori' or by reasoning.
Kant looked at 4 propositions:
Analytical propositions: The conclusion is already in the subject of the sentence e.g. 'a tall man is a man'. These are also called 'deductive truths', these are true by definition. To say that 'a tall man isn't a man' would be a contradiction.
Synthetic propostions: The statement 'Tuesday was a wet day' is one that can't be proved. Kant wouldn't admit that synthetic propositions are known through experience.
A priori propositions: These link to analytical propositions because they are drawn from experience and can be based on other ideas. The best example of an a priori is Descartes' Cogito 'I think therefore I am'. There are two types of a priori - analytical and synthetic.
Analytical a priori is a statement that goes nowhere and nothing can be used from these and are just basic tautologies e.g. 'the world is the world'.
Synthetic a priori is the development of an a priori idea and extra knowledge is added. An example of this is the possible existence of other planets/worlds.
Kant also discussed God's existence using 3 arguments, he used the Ontological argument to say that God is the ultimate being so must exist. He used the Cosmological argument to say that for anything to exist, an absolute being must exists and this is God. Finally, the Physico-Theological argument says that the universe has an order, which is evidence of the world having purpose. The moral laws we have prove that God exists.
Hegel
According to Hegel, history has a purpose and that every happens for a reason and was interested in the processes involved in history.
He opposed Kantian ideas and held similar views to those of Hobbes.
Hegel said that Ancient Greece was the main thesis of European thought and society. Hegel envisaged an 'organic state' that would be ruled in a way that takes people's true nature into account. He said that the Prussian and Ancient Greek states were close to this perfect state.
TB 2012
Kant
The Critique of Pure Reason
Kant's book The Critique of Pure Reason criticised empiricists and empirical ideas. Kant said that none of our knowledge comes from experience, our knowledge is 'a priori' or by reasoning.
Kant looked at 4 propositions:
Analytical propositions: The conclusion is already in the subject of the sentence e.g. 'a tall man is a man'. These are also called 'deductive truths', these are true by definition. To say that 'a tall man isn't a man' would be a contradiction.
Synthetic propostions: The statement 'Tuesday was a wet day' is one that can't be proved. Kant wouldn't admit that synthetic propositions are known through experience.
A priori propositions: These link to analytical propositions because they are drawn from experience and can be based on other ideas. The best example of an a priori is Descartes' Cogito 'I think therefore I am'. There are two types of a priori - analytical and synthetic.
Analytical a priori is a statement that goes nowhere and nothing can be used from these and are just basic tautologies e.g. 'the world is the world'.
Synthetic a priori is the development of an a priori idea and extra knowledge is added. An example of this is the possible existence of other planets/worlds.
Kant also discussed God's existence using 3 arguments, he used the Ontological argument to say that God is the ultimate being so must exist. He used the Cosmological argument to say that for anything to exist, an absolute being must exists and this is God. Finally, the Physico-Theological argument says that the universe has an order, which is evidence of the world having purpose. The moral laws we have prove that God exists.
Hegel
According to Hegel, history has a purpose and that every happens for a reason and was interested in the processes involved in history.
He opposed Kantian ideas and held similar views to those of Hobbes.
Hegel said that Ancient Greece was the main thesis of European thought and society. Hegel envisaged an 'organic state' that would be ruled in a way that takes people's true nature into account. He said that the Prussian and Ancient Greek states were close to this perfect state.
TB 2012
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)