Monday 7 May 2012

History and context of journalism - Revision notes 2


Karl Marx;
-          Sensation or perception is an interaction between subject and object; the bare object, apart from the activity of the percipient, is a mere raw material, which is transformed in the process of becoming known.
-          Both subject and object, the knower and thing known, are in the continual process of mutual adaptation. He calls this the dialectical because it is never fully complete.
-          He denies ‘sensation’ – we only notice things as part of the process is acting with reference to them and any theory which leaves this out is a misleading abstraction.
Philosophy of history;
-          Believes un the dialectical process.
-          But differs from Hegel; Hegel believed the motive force call the spirit, which causes human history to develop accordingly to stages of the dialectic set forth in the ‘Logic.’
-          Marx believed it is not a spirit driving history, instead it is just inevitiable – it is man’s reaction to matter, of which the most important part is the mode of production.
-          His idea of materialism, here, becomes economics.
-          Politics, religion, philosophy and art of any epoch in human history are outcomes of its methods of production and, lesser extent, of distribution.
-          Marx substituted class, for Hegels idea of nations, to be the driving force of the dialectical.
-          This is outlined to its greatest extent in the Communist Manifesto.
-          Marx’s revolutionary ideas are identifiable in his similarities with Rousseau, in that property is the cause of class struggle and is what caused us to be civilized. The fact the proletariat are unable to possess property,
Communist manifesto;
-          Suggests that class struggle 'sprouted' from the 'ruins' of a feudal society.
-          He believed there to be a hostile divide in society, one in which the bourgeois were in possession of the proletarian; forming a new kind of oppression and struggle. These two classes were seen by Marx to be directly against each other.
-          Historical materialism for Marx shows that class struggle and desire for high exchange value have given power to the bourgeoisie, gradually, over time and that he believes this to be the reason for historical and social progression to its current state of capitalism.

-          The bourgeois ' has resolved personal worth into exchange value,' and have created a false consciousness of the proletariat through politics and religion, undermining and exploiting them further.  He believed that he bourgeoisie could not exist 'without constantly revolutionizing the instruments of production,’
-          He says the bourgeois have ‘succeeded in gathering masses within the population, centralizing the means of production and concentrating property in few hands.’ Creating the Proletariat.
-          The drive for the bourgeois to create capital through the exploitation of the proletariat means the proletariat lose character; they are seen as machines to produce profitable commodities, even though they could be considered commodities themselves. 
-          He believed that the development of industry and the growing need for capital would lead the proletariat into becoming class conscious and, in doing so, will go through many changes during the progression to revolution and gaining the means of production through the overthrowing of bourgeois
-          For Marx, capitalism was inevitably doomed to collapse because it held flaws within it that would ultimately destroy itself; the proletariat will only speed up the process.

Weber – Bureaucracy;
-          Is rule from a desk or office by written documentation, and a servant of government.
-          Weber disregards bureaucracy being neutral and suggests every bureaucracy has its own interests. It is merely a means to give policy direction.
-          The modern bureaucracy came from the middle ages; kings riding on horseback with clergy men recording the journey and sending it to correspondents.
-          Weber believes armies have become bureaucratized.
-          He points out, educational institutions, churches and other institutions have a bureaucracy. They all have staff for keeping records and communications.
-          It is a pervasive feature of modern society.

-          Weber sets out an ‘ideal type’ for bureaucracies; characterised by divisions of labour trough rules, impersonally applied, and staffing by full time professionals who have no ownership to the means of administration; jobs, funds, and a salary aren’t based on labour value.
-          Bureaucrats are even further removed from property because there are no longer ‘prebends’; instead there is a salary.
-          The highest value of a bureaucracy is reliable rule following.
-          Modern bureaucrats do no own their jobs – Weber suggests a parallel with capitalist productive enterprise. Which he then compares to soldiers formally owning their weapons, now they don’t, much like workers being separated from their means of production.
-          Division of labour requires stability of staff; so the bureaucracy want educated recruits. This where Weber points out credentialism and that formal educational qualifications are an obsession of the bureaucracy.
Types of legitimate authority;
-          Weber treats bureaucracy under this heading, of which there are three types of authority.
-          Charismatic; it is regarded as legitimate because followers are personally devoted to the gifted leader.
-          Traditional authority; regarded legitimate because everyone has always obeyed the person in position of leader – no one thinks of disrupting them.
-          Rational authority; is the rule of law. It exists in a community where there is respect for the law or where the law is constituted legitimate.
-          The bureaucracy exists as this form of authority. It is seen as the most efficient way of implementing the rule of law, rules are recorded, studied and applied in a reliable way to individual cases.
-          Weber see rule of law to be rational because he believes expediency and rational values are the main forms of rationality and it employs both to gain obedience.
-          Though he views it as efficient he seen bureaucracy as a ‘distasteful triumph’ and identified negative impacts bureaucracy may have on society.
-          He believed that there will be cultural exhaustion through the rationalisation of religion, that the principle of formal equality will eventually rob each individual of nobility and any artistic genius,
-          Weber views bureaucracy in a similar way that Marx views Capitalism. Its spread is inevitable and will affect all areas of life. Though Marx insists capitalism can be overthrown for the good of the people, Weber believes and accepts bureaucracy is inescapable.

Ideal types of sociological organisation;
-          Socialism, nationalism, liberalism etc. and that behind them is a method and hypothesis and successive approximation of truth. He then compared this to social reality and came to the conclusion that there is no absolute knowledge but it is possible to be honest and have reason to able the belief.
-          This is known as agnosticism.
-          He furthered his ideas of sociological ideals with his analysis of what he what he believed to be four types of fundamental social action;
1.          Instrumental – the belief that our actions are rational in order to achieve goodness; going to university will generally get you a good job.
2.          Value – the idea of doing something because it is accepted to be good practice, and is again an example of rationalisation.
3.          Affectual – Something we do for emotional reasons.
4.          Traditional – this is something we do because society has always done it.

History and Context of Journalism - Revision Notes;


German Idealism; 

KANT – Ethics
-          Mataphysics of morals – it contains a ‘categorical imperative ’
-          He despises utilitarianism or any doctrine where morality has been given a purpose outside itself.
-          All moral concepts have their seat and origin wholly ‘a priori’ in reason.
-          The essence of morality is derived from the concept of law; for everything in nature acts according to laws – only rational being has the power of acting according to the idea of law – ie will.
-          The idea of an objective principle in so far as it compelling to the will, its called the command is called an imperative.
-          There are two imperatives – hypothetical and categorical;
-          Hypothetical; ‘you must do so and so if you wish to achieve such – and – such an end’
-          Categorical; a certain kind of action is objectively necessary, without regard to any end. This is synthetic and a priori.
-          Character is deducted by law; the categorical imperative is a single one – ‘act only accordingly to maxim by which you can at the same time will that it shall become a general law.’
-          OR ‘act as if the maxim of your action were to become through your will a general natural law.’

KANT – Theory of Space and Time (noumenal and phenomenal)
-          The immediate objects of perception are due partly to external things and partly to our own perceptive appearance.
-          Kant doesn’t question that our sensations have cause, which he calls ‘thing in themselves’ or the noumenal.
-          What appears to us as in perception, which he calls the phenomenon, consists of two parts; that due to the object (sensation) and the due to our subjective apparatus which is manifold to be ordered in certain relations – the form of the phenomenon.
o   The certain relation is not itself ‘sensation’ and therefore not dependent upon the accident of environment; it is always the same since we carry it with us and it is a priori in the sense that it is not dependent on experience.
-          A pure form of sensibility is called a ‘pure intuition’ and there are two forms -  space and time – one for outer sensations the other inner.
-          To prove space and time are a priori Kant classes two arguments; one metaphysical the second epistemological (transcendental). 
-          The transcendental argument* concerning space is derived from geometry. Kant thinks geometry is not derived from experience, BUT the only way in which intuition can anticipate what will be found in the object is if it contains only the form of sensibility, antedating subjectivity all the actual impressions.
o   The object of sense must obey geometry, because it is concerned with our ways of perceiving and therefore cannot perceive otherwise.
-          TIME is essentially the same argument, though arithmetic replaces geometry with the contention that counting takes time. 

KANT – The Transcendental deduction*
-         The transcendental deduction does not avoid the fact or objectivity of time and cause, but does, in its consideration of a possible logic of the a priori, attempt to make the case for the fact of subjectivity. 
-          Kant states, "although all our knowledge begins with experience, it does not follow that it arises from experience" According to Kant, a priori knowledge is transcendental ( beyond ordinary or common experience, but not beyond human knowledge), or based on the form of all possible experience, while a posteriori knowledge is empirical, based on the content of experience.
-         Unlike the empiricists, Kant thinks that a priori knowledge is independent of the content of experience; unlike the rationalists, Kant thinks that a priori knowledge, in its pure form, that is without any empirical content, is knowledge limited to the deduction of the conditions of possible experience.
-          These a priori, or transcendental conditions, are seated in one's cognitive faculties, and are not provided by experience in general or any experience in particular. 
-     He claimed that a  human subject would not have the kind of experience that it has were these a priori forms not in some way constitutive of him as a human subject. For instance, he would not experience the world as an orderly, rule-governed place unless time and cause were operative in his cognitive faculties.

HEGEL – the dialectic
-          Returned belief in the unreality of separateness; the world is not a collection of hard units – whether atoms or souls – each completely self-subsistent.
-          The apparent self-subsistence  of infinite things to him were an illusion; he held that nothing is ultimately and completely real except the whole.
-          The WHOLE is not a simple substance but a complex system of the sort that we should call and organism.
-          The separate things the world is composed of are not simply and illusion; each has greater or lesser degree of reality and its reality consists in an aspect of a whole which is what is seen to be when viewed truly.
-          This is naturally a disbelief of time and space as such, because these involve separateness and multiplicity.
-          Hegel asserts the real is rational and rational is real. Though he does not mean the empirical use of the real; the observed. He means after the apparent character has been transformed by viewing them as an aspect of a whole – then they are rational.
-          He believed that the only thing that does not change is that things change. He came up with the idea that all things have a “geist” or ghost form - though things change/decay, it is still that thing because of its geist.
THE WHOLE – ‘the absolute’
-          He emphasises logic – the nature of reality can be deducted from sole consideration that it cannot be self-contradictory.
-          The dialectic.
-          Logic is metaphysics – any ordinary predicate (conclusion) taken from the whole of realty, turns out to be contradictory.
-          The dialectic – thesis, anti-thesis and synthesis.
o   Any suggested predicate of the absolute to the conclusion of the dialectic is driven by the force of logic.
-          There is an underlying assumption that nothing can be true unless it is about reality as a whole.
-          Relatives aren’t considered to be real – an uncle is not the absolute, it relies on other factors??
-           There must be a basis of traditional logic in the underlying assumption, which assumes every proposition has a subject and predicate.
-          Everything except the whole has relations to outside things and what in fact only the whole is real.

-          Knowledge as a whole has the triadic movement of the dialectic – it begins with sense perception where there is only awareness of the object.
-          Then sceptical criticism of the senses, it becomes purely subjective and last it reaches the stage of self-knowledge where subject and object are no longer distinct

Self consciousness;
-          Is the highest form of knowledge possessed by the absolute, and the absolute is the while and nothing else exists outside itself for it to know.
-          Reason ‘is the conscious certainty of being all reality.’
o   Doesn’t mean a separate person is all of reality.
o   What is real in him is his participation in reality as a whole.
o   As we become more rational, this participation is increased.

-          The absolute idea, which the ‘logic ends is like Aristotles god – the absolute cannot think of anything but itself since there is nothi8ng else except the way s of apprehending reality.  
-           
SCHOPENHAUER –
-          He dislikes Christianity
-          He began emphasis on will- for him will, though metaphysically fundamental, is evil – an opposition only possible for a pessimist.
-          He acknowledges three sources of philosophy; Kant, Plato and Vpanishads.
-          His out has a temperamental affinity with the Hellenistic age, valuing peace more than victory, quientism more than reform, which he regards inevitability futile.
-          Anti democratic and hate the1848 revolution.

The world as will and idea; 1818
-          His system is an adaptation of Kant, but emphasises different aspects of the critique from others such as Hegel.
-          They removed the thing in itself, whereas Schop retained it and identified with it.
-          What appears to perception as my body is reality my will.
-          Kant maintained that the study of law could take us behind phenomenon and give us knowledge which sense perception cannot give ad is concerned with will.
-          The body is the appearance of which will is the reality, because the phenomenon corresponds to volition as a bodily movement.
-          The will behind phenomena cannot consist of a number of different volitions.
-          Time and space only belong to phenomena; the thing in itself is not in space or time – this idea is shared with Kant.
-          My will CANNOT be dated or composed of separate acts of will because it is space and time which are the source of plurality – my will, therefore, is one and timeless.
-          Will when relate to the will of the universe; ‘my separateness is an illusion resulting in my subjective apparatus if spatial-temporal perception.'
-          There is one vast will appearing in the whole course of nature, animate and inanimate alike.

-          The cosmic will is wicked; or at least a source of endless suffering.
-          Suffering is essential to all life an increase by knowledge.
-          Will has no fixed end, which is achieved, would bring contentment.
-          No such thing as happiness – an unfulfilled wish causes pain.
-          Instinct leads us to procreate, but we associate with the sexual act.
-          He believes in the idea of Nirvana.
-          The cause of suffering is the will; the less we exercise will the less we shall suffer.
-          Here knowledge is useful – but has to be of a certain kind.
-          Distinction of one man and another is part of the phenomenal world and disappears when the world is truly seen.