HCJ - Lecture 3 - "We hold these truths to be self evident"

During this weeks HCJ lecture we discussed Frege, Nietzsche, Marx and Freud. We began with Frege and discussed his notion of logic. Frege believed that individual propositions have no meaning, so the example given in the lecture was that 'Socrates is a man', does not work in Frege's logic, but it would only make sense in respect to other propositions. From what I can make of this confusing subject it is apparent that Frege can only understand a sentence in logic if it contains a sense (a proposition) and a reference (a truth value), or that the proposition only has a meaning in respect to other propositions. So perhaps something that would make sense to Frege would be that 'Socrates is a man, if he is not a woman'.

During the enlightenment period it was a struggle for knowledge and to find out what individual things meant, and there was a constant battle to find out the truths of the World they lived in. So people like Hume and Kant went about there way to find out what things like words meant to us, and they came up with the theory that words only had one meaning and that a sentence could only mean one thing. Moving in the Romantic period, Frege totally dismisses this idea and we can see why by looking at this sentence:

'I thought she was his wife' - As explained in the lecture, we can put different emphasis on different parts of the sentence or on different words to make the sentence seem different. For example: 'I thought SHE was his wife', thinking that his wife was someone else, or. 'I THOUGHT she was his wife' maybe it is not his wife, but perhaps it is his bit-on-the-side?

Subjectivist epistemology - there is no universal truth, only subjective impressions of relative value. This is something that Marx, Nietzsche and Freud would agree with and again rejects the enlightenment beliefs that there is a universal truth. So an objectivist (opposite to subjectivist) would believe that once he is dead, the World would still exist and carry on without them, whereas a subjectivist would believe that the World would no longer be there if they were to die. A subjectivist would need reasoning and logic in order to believe in something and see it as wholly true and that the truth of something depends on you as a person and your perspective. This once again rejects the enlightenment that there is only one truth. So for example if I can see from my perspective that Manchester United are the greatest football team in the World, and from my perspective I believe it to be true, because they have won numerous honours and have the greatest manager of all time, does not mean that someone else may believe Manchester City are the greatest football team of all time because they recently defeated United. In a subjectivist opinion, both would be right, as both have valid perspective, but both opinions mean that there is no universal truth.

'Ruling ideas is every epoch and the ideas of the ruling class' is something that lives on from Marx. This is the notion that everything that we believe in, and the 'norms' of everyday stem from the ruling ideas of the majorities opinion and perspective. So this again ties in with the subjectivist view. For example in some parts of the world it is religion or normal to take part in cannibalism, whereas in most it is seen as 'taboo'. This comes under the term of 'anthropology' which is a theory of Frederick Engles. He believed that all values are different as are the ruling bodies systems of morality. A criticism of Freud is that he lacked anthropological perspective which made him less of a subjectivist. We are shown this in his case study 'Dora' where he does not show that there can be a no connection between sex and reproduction.

During the lecture we were given three sentences and asked to try and explain them and try and understand the sentential logic:

1) The evening star is the same as the morning star
I couldn't think of anything for this one, but after some research it seems as if it has a lot to do with astronomy and that Venus is seen as a morning and evening star as it is the closest 'star' to the Sun. Saying this, in relation to Frege, it seems as though he has some sort of formula to determine what this actually means. So he believes a=a and a=b but you can see with inspection that 'a' in fact equals 'a', whereas a=b has to be examined in respect to what it is we are discussing and what 'a' and 'b' represent. In this case I will say Wayne Rooney (a) = Michael Owen (b). We can not see from simple inspection whether this is true but if we say a=a (Wayne Rooney = Wayne Rooney), we can see from simple inspection that this is true, but it will take a lot more than simple inspection to determine whether or not Wayne Rooney and Michael Owen are the same. In the context of the evening star and the morning star, with the evening star representing 'a', and morning star 'b', it would take some astronomical review to determine if they are in fact the same thing, whereas we can see with simple inspection that the morning star is the same as the morning star.
2) The present King of France is not bald
The first thing that came to mind when this sentence was shown was that there may not be any King of France at the time. So to say that the King of France is bald is neither true nor false as the whole statement is incorrect. So it would be similar to saying The country of 'Manc-land' is the richest in the World, when in fact no such country exists so it can not be true, but in the same respect it may so be that it is the richest, but how would we know if it does not exist? So is the statement true, false or meaningless? It is not true because there is no current King of France so how can he be bald, secondly it can not be false because saying it is false means that he has indeed got hair, which again means there is a King of France, which there is not. So this means that the sentence must therefore be meaningless; but how can the statement be meaningless if it is something we can understand and interpret?
3) There was nobody on the road
From what Chris said in the lecture I can get that what is meant from this sentence is that if nobody was on the road, there had to be someone on the road, for 'nobody' IS 'somebody'. So what would need to be said to understand the sentence or to make the sentence have meaning would be something like: For this given moment, in this given World on any given road there is not anyone on them. Or something along those lines!

Eastleigh Vs Oxford City and Sam Wilson story- de-brief week 4 (with match report and written story)

This week we took three cameras to Eastleigh to film their F.A Cup clash with Oxford City. After much criticism at recent de-briefs coming in the form of not having enough angles and shots, our task was to get replays and close ups.

Negatives:

> As-live commentary is still not working. We needed this week to try and make it seem like we actually commentated on the game live, and not just the goals afterwards. Chris' advice was to have the live commentary under my voiceover during the build up to the goal, but obviously quieter so they wouldn't drown each other out. So the plan is to quieten the commentary down and once the voiceover finishes, turn have the commentary louder so it comes into effect and actually sounds like we are commentating live.

> One problem I noticed with the package that makes it sound a little wrong is the replays. The replay clips are zoomed in and slowed down, and when slowing down, instead of carrying the 'live' sound under the clip of the replay, I have instead slowed down the audio from the replay shot. I just think it makes it look sloppy, so this week I will aim to carry the sound under from the live action.

> Sam Wilson interview - the framing of the shot is out, it was too central and not tight enough on his head and shoulders. Also the sound is slightly low and needed turning up, so in future hold the mic closer. Although the package was an OOV, it would have been nicer to get some better cut aways of Wilson, as oppose to him training before the match and coming on to the pitch. For example it would have looked better if I got him in actual action, maybe having a shot, or going in for a tackle.

Positives:

> Three cameras! This gave me a better looking package all over, close ups and different views of the players/managers and slow motion action replays. One of my favourite parts of the package is the Oxford penalty from in front of the goal. It was a similar view to the view Sky Sports use.

> The scripting of the piece I have had some good feedback on, more entertaining and statistic based made it more interesting for the viewer.


Match Report:

Eastleigh’s miserable start to the new season has continued, after Oxford City knocked them out of the F.A Cup this weekend.

Eastleigh manager, Iain Baird, has criticised his side for conceding early goals, and it only took twenty minutes until they were a goal down, with City’s Steve Basham lobbing the ball over Eastleigh goalkeeper Gareth Barfoot.

The home side had chances to pull level but were wasteful in front of goal, and were almost made to pay when Andrew White brought down Darren Pond in the box. But for the second home game in a row, Barfoot pulled off a double save to deny the visitors.

The away side’s lead was doubled shortly after half-time, this time Darren Pond unleashing an unstoppable shot, which nestled in to the top corner of Barfoot's net.

Eastleigh were given a chance to get back in to the game shortly afterwards when striker Jamie Slabber scored from a penalty, but it was cancelled out moments later when City midfielder Pond got his second, and Oxford's third of the game, with a strong header.

The game ended 3-1 to Oxford City and they were rewarded with an away tie at Weston-Super-Mare in the next round, meanwhile Eastleigh turn their attention to the league, where up next is second place Welling United.

Sam Wilson:

Sam Wilson has agreed a new two-year contract at Blue Square South strugglers Eastleigh, despite interest from several clubs including Premier League outfit Fulham.

The 17-year-old striker had been on a trial with Fulham in previous weeks, and has impressed the Cottagers after scoring two goals in a 4-1 win over Portsmouth.

Wilson has expressed his joy at signing his new contract, ‘I’m very happy I can finalise being at Eastleigh’.

Wilson scored ten goals in nineteen appearances for Eastleigh reserves last year, and made his debut for the senior team in the Hampshire Senior Cup aged just 16.

Eastleigh fans were presented with Wilson’s contract signing moment just before their F.A Cup clash with Oxford at the weekend, and made an appearance from the bench.

For the highlights visit:

http://winol.co.uk/

OR

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFZ464LBokc

Manchester United Vs Manchester City preview

If you are a Manchester City fan I would not read on if I were you, you will no doubt experience anger, jealousy and a few tears if you continue to read. But I am more than happy to direct you to SkySports for a more unbiased preview of the Manchester derby!

So this Sunday we will see one of the biggest Manchester derbys of all time, with the noisy neighbours becoming noisier by the day, they currently sit top of the Premier League, two points clear of United, but obviously still lightyears away when it comes to everything else (trophies, history, prestige). With the game being at Old Trafford it will go without saying that United fans, players and staff will expect the three points, whereas City will be content with a draw as it would keep them at the top with United still having to travel to the Etihad Stadium (although United will probably pick up all three there as well). Both sides remain unbeaten in the league this year, and something will most certainly give this weekend.

In recent years United have struggled in the early stages of the new seasons, but The Red Devils have enjoyed a surprisingly good start to their new campaign, picking up notable wins against Arsenal and Chelsea, and equalling the tally for most goals scored in the first six premier league games (21). Although they have had a good start to the season, recent performances have not been up-to-scratch, squeezing out a 1-1 draw at Anfield, and needing two penalties to see off Otelul Galati in the Champions League, but most critics will agree, this is a sign of Champions, not playing well, but grinding out them hard results.

City have had one of their best starts to a Premier League campaign, proving that if you throw money at something it will eventually come good, but they are yet to become too much of a thorn in United's side, and although they have been scoring freely with the likes of Aguero and Dzeko scoring for fun, they haven't posted any notable wins, such as the reigning champions, and have also struggled in the Champions League. United have also not been playing well in Europe but it does beg the question, can City handle the 60+ games a season, that being a 'big club' brings. So far they are managing it just about, but come February/March it remains to be seen if they can hold the pace they are currently setting.

Other than having a stronger squad, Man United have one not so secret weapon that will prove to be the difference this weekend, and that is Sir Alex Ferguson. He has been preparing for this game since last Saturday, resting players against Liverpool and keeping the likes of (Wayne) Rooney, Nani, and (Javier) Hernandez fit. Fergie also knows just what it takes to overcome City rivals in such a high profile game, now i'm not saying Mancini doesn't know what it takes, just that Fergie will be a million times more prepared and he probably already knows how the game will go (to an extent).


Ones to watch:

Man Utd:

Rooney - he will be absolutely itching to get going here, didn't play in the FA Cup loss to City last year due to suspension, and recent events in the England camp and negativity in the press will leave him with a point to prove. For United's sake lets hope he doesn't direct his energy in a negative way. Scored the winner with a tremendous overhead volley last year.

De Gea - he will be tested, been a little hit and miss this year and the occasion may get to him. Hopefully Rio and Vidic will be there to give him the confidence he needed with Rio missing the mid-week game so he could play here and Vidic coming back from injury this week.

Young - Wing play will be the key to creating chances, and the more chalk Ashley Young gets on his boots the better. He has proved to be extremely influential with his contributions this year, and Sunday will be no different. Critical to feeding Rooney and other front players. Can even pop up with a goal of his own at any given time.

Man City:

Joe Hart - he is undoubtedly an amazing goal-keeper. Something tells me he will be the busier of the two keepers on Sunday, and if he has a good game, he may be able to scape his side a point.

Aguero - top goalscorer for City this season and is in prolific form. He will be out to prove a point to City's rivals, but Ferguson would already know this so he will probably be defended out of the game.

My prediction - United 3 - 0 City

Probable line ups:

United:

GK De Gea
RB Smalling CB Rio CB Vidic LB Evra
CM Carrick CM Anderson
RW Nani LW Young
CF Rooney
ST Hernandez (4-2-2-1-1 attacking) (4-5-1 defending)

City:

GK Hart
RB Richards CB Kompany CB Lescott LB Kolarov
RM Milner CM Barry CM Toure LM Silva
ST Dzeko ST Aguero (4-4-2)

Week 3 - Eastbourne Borough Vs Eastleigh - Critical notes

In week 3 of WINOL I went to film Eastleigh away form home at Eastbourne in the Blue Square South. After the previous weeks match against Cinderford Town, Eastleigh were looking to get some points on the board.

Positives:

The first main positive to take out of my package from last week was that I went above the call of duty, to an away match to keep our dedicated Eastleigh fans/audience in touch with Sportsweek, and to show that we can be their number one source for highlights each week. Secondly, Gareth pointed out that my scripting was better from the previous weeks, so that my voiceover was a bit more interesting to listen to which meant that my package as whole was better to watch.

Negatives:

In regards to my package the main critical points that were made, were in regards again to the lack of camera angles and the fact that we only had the one camera so close-ups and a second view for slow motion replays were not possible. There was a couple of technical issues with this weeks package, the first being that the match was filmed in widescreen, and I was unable to change as I only got to the match minutes before kick-off so didn't want to miss anything due to messing around with the camera settings, or even making it worse. To improve in future weeks it will be beneficial to check all equipment before hand and to try and plan better so I arrive earlier, so if there is anything wrong, I have a decent amount of time to rectify it. There was also something I noticed, probably because of editing and the fact that I was the one filming, but the second goal scored for Eastbourne could have been filmed better, as I had to catch up with play, meaning I missed the build up to the goal, and all the viewer would have seen was the player through on goal and the camera just about catching the shot.


Match Report:

WINOL/Sportsweek - week 2 - debrief - Critical notes

In the first serious week on WINOL and Sportsweek I went to Eastleigh to film their F.A Cup match against Cinderford Town. I was also asked to present this week, which was slightly nerve-racking, considering I hadn't done anything like this before!

The main issues that I came across this week from a personal point of view was that of sound. Obviously when at a football match the crowd are the main source of noise, and depending on whats happening in the match the atmosphere will be different. As I am moving clip-to-clip, different things are happening, and the crowd noise is different. For example, in one of the clips someone may score, with the last noise of the clip being the crowd celebrating, causing high volume levels which causes two problems: one, the voiceover is drowned out, and two, the next clip where we are building up to the next match event the crowd are much more subdued, so it goes from really loud, to really quiet. Obviously I tried to edit the sound as much as possible, so that we could make it seem realistic (so not make it seem as if no one was there), but also so you could hear the voiceover, and make the clips flow better in terms of volume.

Critical feedback I received from Gareth was that my scripting was a little repetitive and that it seemed a bit boring (Smith scored, and then 10 minutes later he scored again). So in the next package my scripting (hopefully) will be a little better and a bit more lively in order to keep the watchers interested. In Mondays de-brief Brian pointed out the issue with the 'as-live' commentary. Now although it wasn't my voice on the commentary, it was still my package and my responsibility. We were told that this also sounds a little bit dull and that there was no genuine build-up to the possible goal that the 'as-live' commentator is describing.

Although the shots I got were good for the resources possible, we have been told that we could do more in terms of filming. Instead of having just the one camera, we could have 2 or 3. So more Sky Sports style, so maybe if there is a contentious decision, we could have a close up from behind the goal and do action replays. It would make the quality of the package a lot better.


SPORTSWEEK PRESENTING
As mentioned above this was my first week presenting for Sportsweek, and the first presenting role I have ever done. Luckily enough it wasn't filmed live, although it was still very nerving. I was told that it was good enough all though it took me a while to get it right. Looking back on it, it appears to me that I can maybe put emphasis on the wrong words, and that maybe I need to work more on where the emphasis should go. For example: 'Eastleigh hosted Cinderford Town on Saturday, I went down to the Silverlake'. The emphasis would sound best on 3 or 4 of the words, perhaps the team names and maybe the 'I', but I felt I was lacking this in the presentation.


If anyone else has any critical advice they would like to give then feel free, every little helps!

To watch the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtpTbJqhGIk

Yellow Journalism

William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer were the two main men in New York when it came to journalism in the late 1800's and early 1900's. The yellow press or yellow journalism is falsehood, lies or an alteration of the truth done in order to sell more papers and keep the readers that little bit more entertained. Pulitzer and Hearst were extremely reliant on this 'technique' and used it well to their benefits.

Pulitzer and Hearst had rival papers, which competed, in the journalism market; Pulitzer’s paper was called The World, and Hearst’s, The Journal. The papers did make a lot of people angry, but at the same time they were a huge source of entertainment for the mass.

The most important factor I believe that contributed to yellow journalism is firstly the industrial revolution, which meant the invention of the printing press, and then the ever-increasing drive for circulation because of the entertaining stories.

The term ‘yellow’, from what I understand derives from a comic strip of the ‘yellow kid’ that was published in The World, and was published using a new ink form that was non-smearing ink. The comic strip was seen as extremely important at the time and it is for this reason the term ‘yellow’ was formed.


The Spanish-American War

Hearst and Pulitzer were extremely influential in antagonising people before and during the Spanish-American war during the late 1800’s. Some people would even say they were solely to blame. This was because of their stories and photos that they published in their papers.

The war was declared shortly after the sinking of Battleship Maine. The ship was a US war ship, which was docked in Cuba. It came under attack, and was sunk with 44 sailors being killed and many more injured. Once Hearst and Pulitzer got wind of the event, they pretty much had a field day blaming the ‘cowardly Spanish’.

At the time the Cubans were under rule from the Spanish, and Hearst sent reporters to Cuba to report on the state of living there. The reporters found little in the way of proof of any wrongdoing or news worthy stories, but this didn’t matter to Hearst. All he wanted was photos and in his words he would ‘furnish the war’. So in other words, he used his position of power as a top journalist to make it look as if the Spanish were these horrible people, who deserved to be attacked, and that they needed to be stopped, when in actual fact the reporters found no proof of this. Headlines came out such as ‘Spanish Cannibalism’ and ‘Inhumane Torture’.

WINOL bulletin - week one (dummy)

My first week on WINOL, was an emotional one, and I can say with a great deal of certainty that I will never forget it! So here is my story/soap opera/drama of what happened when I went out and took up my new role as Eastleigh Correspndent for Winchester News Online.

I went out to cover a fantastic spectacle of a game, I thought I was going to bump in to Andy Townsend or even, if I was really, really lucky Chris Kamara! I was covering the Wessex Premier league clash of the titans Alresford Town Vs Hamworthy United! Unfortunately, I didnt manage to bump in to Kammy, but I did get to see a cracker of a game.

My first hurdle I had to overcome, was a very strange, but ridiculous problem. Chris has actually pointed out in our recent HCJ lecture that you would be foolish to assume every will run smoothly, and when I ran out of petrol two miles from the Winchester services with 40 minutes until kick-off, this was realised! Luckily enough, I was going with another person (namely Chizzle) who had the equipment. With a cab quoting £60 to take me two miles I was lost! I did have a very good friend who lived in Winchester that drove, who managed to come and bring me petrol in my hour of need, but despite his best efforts I was still late, having to send Chizzle in the cab by himself to start without me!

I only arrived 20 miinutes late which was kind of a result considering the circumstances, and luckily enough I had missed no goals or moments of controversy. We were filming from groudn level, so it was very hard to get a great shot, and also, with only one camera, not wanting to miss any action, found myself zoomed out on a lot of the shots.

During the de-brief, Angus picked up on the shots and advised us for future to try and get closer shots as it will look a lot better, and also that we still couldnt get the full shot because of where we set up.

I had the footage, now it was time for the dreaded FINAL CUT PRO! I learned a new phrase whilst editing: 'disco-wheeling'. When the mac/Final Cut decides to destroy your life by freezing, and if you haven't saved your work then it is literally pull your hair out time! This happened to me once. And never again will it happen. I have however taken some new techniques away, courteousy of Mr Editor aka The Sparrow, Mr Gareth Messenger. I have learned to do cut aways, so when the goal is scored, we cut away to the celebration, but keep the sound going on underneath, which makes it look proffesional (and apparently Angus likes this). I have also learned how to manage audio levels so the voiceover is not drowned out. This brings me to my next hurdle.

VOICEOVERS!!!! 6 TIMES! 4 DIFFERENT ROOMS! My first one was so echoey it sounded like i was in a church hall, after trying again, no change. We then discovered that to and from this 'church hall' the reason for the echoes was in fact because I had the gun mic plugged in to the wrong input on the camera! Silly me! Then, we were kicked out of this room by a rather disgruntled and Anne Robinson like character who insisted 'this room is not for journalists!' So onto room number two. Right input, all done, came back, captured the sound, but no sound came out. Something had gone wrong clearly. I think, that I didn't press record, but I don't want to believe that i'm that stupid. Nevertheless, I tried again and again it came back echoey. This time it was becuase of the room. So I tried the next door room, there was a projector on, but didn't think it would come up on the recording. I was wrong. Finally, I managed to get the studio which was perfect, and just as I was about to start recording, the battery on the camera dies. Great stuff. Finally, got it plugged into the mains, and recorded and all up on Final Cut, with the package about 45 minutes later than it should have been, but it made it!

Things to do next time:

1) Get closer shots
2) Make sure the camera can face the whole pitch for a wider shot
3) Once on Final Cut Pro SAVE AT EVERY GIVEN MOMENT
4) Make sure the mic is plugged into the right input and make sure I am in a decent enough room for recording (also make sure i press record)
5)...erm, make sure I fill up with petrol before hand! And expect the unexpected!!

Citizen Kane

When I first found out that we were to be watching Citizen Kane in our HCJ lecture, I was a little bit worried that it would bore me to tears, having heard so much negative feedback from anyone that has ever watched it (even including the American sitcom 'Firends'). However, it was not as boring as expected, and I was actually pleasantly surprised (it wasn't no Fast and Furious, but it was still interesting).




The way I saw the film was that it was a news reporter trying to figure out what 'Citizen Kane's' dying words 'rosebud' had meant - and the film dealt with many flashbacks in order to go over Kane's life as this journalist questioned different people who new Kane, and what they thought it may have to do with.

Charles Foster Kane surged to power in the journalistic world, by taking over at a struggling newspaper, 'The Enquirer', to which his former parental guardian had run. He then went about his way to highlight anything and everything that could be seen interesting or scandalous to the public, and maybe even at times over-dramatised things to make them more interesting in order to get a higher circulation and earn more money. He even went to a larger newspaper, with a higher reputation then his own, and 'headhunted' or stole their employees, in order to have a formidable news writing team.

The more the film goes on we find out that Kane is his own worst enemy, in that he is extremely arrogant, reckless, attention seeking and has little to no morals. The way in which we are shown examples of his arrogance is in the way in which he talks to Thatcher, the once owner of The Enquirer and his parental guardian. He is always out to wind him up or annoy him in one way or another, the bit that stuck out to me like a sore thumb was the conversation on how to run a newspaper; Thatcher tells Kane that he has lost a million dollars this year, and Kane goes on to tell him, he expects to lose another million this year, and next, and then with a smug grin pronounces that at this rate he will have to close the paper in...60 years.

He seeks attention from everyone and anyone throughout the film, and he wants everyone to like and love him. A prime example of this, is when he brings in all the entertainers when the writers of the newspaper are having a meal, and he wants the everyone to see how great he is, and how much he does for them, but really all he wants is not to give to them but to make them like who he is. He even runs for Governor, to make himself be heard, and for an even wider audience to love him. I think that Kane's relentless search for love, is mainly due to him being placed in a boarding school at a young age, maybe feeling his mothers rejection had this adverse affect on him.

The film ends with his demise when he finally loses his beloved second wife, who feels that she has been let down by her husband, and he recognises that he is incapable of loving anyone else but himself. She shouts at him, exclaiming she has never given her anything. Now he had given her jewellery, clothes, a magnificent home and even an Opera House, but what she s referring to is emotional. Kane has never given her anything emotional, like his love for example.

I think Citizen Kane links in well to what we are going to learn further on in our HCJ lectures as it is from the times of modernism, when we are aware of the fear and 'angst' of the world.

Eastleigh FC

After a fairly promising season last year, Eastleigh looked to be picking up where they left off during the pre-season period, losing only twice out of the nine warm-up matches. They also picked up a couple of notable wins agains a Reading and Southampton XI. However, after an eight place finish last year, missing out on the play-offs by only four points, the start to their seventh successive campaign in the Blue Square South looks slightly bleak, with only two wins from a possible ten. It is still early days, but the next ten or so games will be crucial in defining how the season will pan out for Eastleigh; will it be a relegation battle, or another push for promotion.

Eastleigh were relatively quiet in the transfer market this season, with the main moves being out with Shaun McCauley signing for local rivals Basingstoke on a one year deal. This being said, there have been some new arrivals at the Silverlake Stadium, in the shape of ex-Bristol Rovers Goalkeeper Mike Green and Winger Ryan O'hara who has played for the likes of Scottish outfit Dundee United and Forest Green Rovers. They have also recently extended the loan spell of Norwegian utility player Henrik Breimyr. He is a midfielder by trade but he has proved his worth by filling in at right-back a few times, including the best spell of the season so far for the Spitfires towards the end of August where they were unbeaten in three an recorded back-to-back wins against Dorchester and Weston-super-Mare. It is still unsure as to whether Breimyr will return to Aldershot Town after his loan spell, or sign on a permanent basi with Eastleigh.

This weekend brings an early season 'six-pointer' against fellow strugglers Staines Town, with home advantage, it is key that Eastleigh take this opportunity and build from here onwards if they want any chance of promotion this year.

Ones to watch:

Tom Jordan (Defender) - Captain Fantastic! had a great season last year, the rock of the Spitfires defence. Only Eastleigh player to make it into the leagues team of the year.

Jamie Slabber (Striker) - averages over a goal every two games, and seems like he could be key to the Spitfires promotion hopes this year.

Richard Gillespie (Striker) - has proven prolific for previous clubs, and finished top scorer for Eastleigh in the 2009/10 season, with only injury thwarting his efforts last year, as long as he keeps fit and injury free, his partnership with Slabber could prove priceless

Champions League Final preview - Manchester United Vs Barcelona

With Wembley ready and waiting to host this years biggest club game in the World, the viewing public, the fans, the managers, and the players can do nothing but wait until the battle for the Champions League crown begins. Both Manchester United and Barcelona are worthy finalists this year and have huge experience in recent years at this stage. Barca in fact beat Manchester United at this stage two years ago, whilst Manchester United will be stepping out to their third final in four years.

Manchester United by no means had an easy route to the final, although they made it look so by not even conceding one goal away from home, and only conceding four in the competition so far. They overcame Valencia, Bursaspor and Rangers in the Group Stages, going on to shrugging off Marseille in the Round of the Last 16. They then were rewarded with a Quarter-Final against Premier League Champions Chelsea, with which they outplayed them over the two legs, finally demolishing German side Schalke in the Semi's.

Barcelona have also got an impressive record in the competition this season, only conceding three in the group stages and eight in total. Some may argue on paper they had a more difficult route, but again, they made it look quite easy. They eased past Panathinaikos, Rubin Kazan and FC Copenhagen in the group stages, and then followed by out-classing Arsenal in the last 16. They then faced Shaktar Donetsk in the Quarter-Final, easing past them with an aggregate score of 6-1 meaning they set up a dream tie with their 'El-Classico' rivals, Real Madrid. After and extremely controversial two legs, Barca's quality, and Lionel Messi's, shone through earning them their rightful spot in the season finale.

Barcelona will go into the game as the firm favourites boasting the quality such as 52 goal scored Lionel Messi, and the elegant Spanish midfielder Iniesta. However, Manchester United are hoping to welcome back their Scottish rock, Darren Fletcher, and have some well in-form players such as Antonio Valencia, Javier Hernandez and Wayne Rooney.

Likely Line Ups:
Man Utd -
Van Der Sar
Fabio Ferdinand Vidic Evra
Valencia, Fletcher, Carrick, Park
Rooney, Hernandez

Barcelona -
Valdes
Abidal,Puyol,Pique,Alves
Busquets,Xavi,Iniesta
Messi,Villa,Pedro

Cobbett and Dickens - Change in England

In this weeks lecture we discussed urban and rural England and how it developed; we also discussed the influential figures of the time (Cobbett and Dickens)

England’s economic stature grew after they became involved in the Napoleonic War in 1800. The implementation of income tax came in to affect in order to fund the war effort. The English inevitably succeeded ad the naval power became absolute in 1805 after all French Ports were blockaded which meant that the French were unable to export any goods. Therefore, England experienced a boom in exports and it came to a point where the British were actually supplying the French.

The Translantic Triangular Trade:

1) British ports send goods to Africa in return for slaves.

2) Slaves sent to America, and traded for cotton.

3) Cotton makes clothes that were then either sold on or sent to Africa for more slaves

This was beneficial to the British economy, but it became harder after the 1833 abolition of slavery act, although it did still continue.

The end of the war saw an end to the boom, and the British government had to do something in order to maintain and economic stability.

Corn Laws – A law, which put a tax on any, imported goods (grains)

What the Corn Laws done were protected the security of English farms, but for the poor who relied on cheap bread, it was bad, as it pushed many below the bread line. This led to extreme conditions in the slum areas of urban cities such as London and Manchester, and many people were falling victim to serious diseases such as Cholera. Anger began to mount against the lower class and this was something the government was fearful of, as they did not want to see a repeat of the French Revolution. They were therefore very brutal in putting down any from of revolt, and generally criminalized the poor. In most cases the government would have the revolting poor deported to places such as Australia, but their fear was shown at the Peterloo Massacre when 60,000 peaceful protesters were shown a barrage of violence after they criticized the fact that only 2% of citizens had the vote; 11 people were killed.


The government was seen as corrupt as it was made up of only the rich, who would have generally been happy with current situations; they were making money because of the Corn Laws and they were living in good conditions. The reform act of 1832 did set about changing this, but it only gave some middle class the vote, which meant it was still corrupt, as the working class still did not have a say. However, in fear of revolution the government had two choices: either pay workers more so they can afford bread, or repeal the Corn Laws so they could afford bread, the latter being the option they took.

Farming:

Cobbett was extremely passionate when it came to farming and the rural lifestyle. He was extremely un-happy at seeing the majority of the countryside empty and he even argued that the population of England could not be growing, as he cannot see any people, but in fact it had doubled from 8.3 million to 17 million.


Enclosure – when a field would be divided up into common land, cattle would graze.

The landowners gave up enclosure, as they needed bigger fields in order to make way for new technology. This meant the farm workers had to go in search of other jobs that meant they had to migrate to the cities.

In 1830 Cobbett got into trouble for voting for the swing riots. These were riots that opposed the implementation of new technology on farms, therefore driving out the rural laborers.

Cobbett wrote the Rural Rides, which was first published at the political register. Cobbett went on horseback through the countryside of Southeast England and the Midlands in order to highlight the problems of rural England and how the relationship between landowner and worker had deteriorated. After the tax on newspapers meant that few people could afford them he created his works in to pamphlets, which were nicknamed 2-penny trash. It soon got a circulation of 40,000. In the majority of these pamphlets, Cobbett attacked the government and called for a reform, which he got into trouble for. He was tried and imprisoned in Newgate Prison for two years.

The rioting and opposition forced the government into a corner and again in fear of revolution, they implemented the Speenhamland system. This was a means tested system that offered some relief to the poor. It would work on the number of children to the price of bread. However, this was easily exploited by the idle poor and encouraged the poor to have more children. The government needed to implement something more full proof.

The Workhouse:

The Workhouse/Poorhouse was a stigmatized form of relief, which was offered as a ‘last resort’ for the poor. It came about in 1834 when the New Poor Law was implemented; meaning that no able bodied person was to receive any form of support from the government unless it was the workhouse. It would encourage the able bodied to find alternative work, as they made the conditions extremely vile. They would give you the bear minimum for food, money and health. It was divided into sections for children, men and women, and often children found themselves un-blocking heavy machinery, as their hands were the only hands small enough to fit. Jeremy Bentham, who we discussed in the first lecture, was fully supportive of this method, as he believed it to be the greatest good, for the greatest number.

The Andover Scandal:

The workhouse seemed to be a good idea, but it was often taken advantage of by the rich. The workhouse in Andover was put in the limelight when it was revealed that conditions were so poor that paupers were being starved, therefore eating peelings left for the pigs and sucking on the bones they were supposed to be grinding for fertilizer. Any body found misbehaving was also locked in the mortuary for punishment.

Dickens was somebody who attacked the New Poor Law reformation, something that we probably all know about from the famous ‘sir, can I have some more’ quote from Oliver Twist. Dickens was a fan of the life of a city dweller, and was also described as a Champion of the City. He loved the idea of a powerful and rich city, but he was appalled by the conditions of some of the slum areas. He believed that they were too overcrowded and ridden with disease and famine and by writing novels such as Bleak House, Oliver Twist and Little Dorrit he went about trying to influence the middle class into change, as it was this audience that had the power to change. Even though the lower classes would have agreed with Dickens a lot of them would not have the power to make changes, and the majority were illiterate anyway.

Super injunctions - are they needed? I cant Imogen why?!

For a few weeks now the United Kingdom has been in huge debate as to whether the super injunctions certain people get out to protect themselves from being reported in the media are actually needed in this day in age, when something as big as a footballer having an alleged affair, gets leaked on social networking sites, such as twitter, and other forums and blogs.

The super injunctions force media outlets such as newspapers and TV from reporting on the holder of the injunction, even to the point of being gagged from saying if they actually have an injunction or not. These laws only apply in the UK, and places such as America are allowed to publish whatever they please, as the injunctions do not take affect.

When watching the news, or reading a paper, they will either blank out the photo of the holder of the injunction, or they will blank out their name/s. However, today a Scottish newspaper (Scotland Herald), put a face to one of these holders of an super injunction, only covering their eyes with a 'censored' banner.

This all came about after a mysterious twitter account tweeted the name of a football star who was supposedly having an affair with previous Big Brother contestant, Imogen Thomas. The majority of the UK population knew who she was allegedly having an affair with, however, it had not been officially published. This then begs the question, what on Earth is the point in the injunction in the first place?

Public Affairs revision notes - Westminster

Westminster

Made up of House of Commons and House of Lords

Commons – elected
Lords – not elected

Lords – made up of peers. Hereditary peers (these are being slowly cut from the House of Lords but still around 90), bishops

Peers – can be elected by the government – scandals of buying peerages – life peers (doctors, judges, etc e.g. Lord Sugar)

Peers – not paid a salary, do not belong to a constituency
Journalists have a PRIVILEGE to know what happens in Westminster

Sub judice rules:

1) If something is being considered by court
2) Cant repeat or say anything that can be seen as contempt

House of Commons – not supposed to mention the Royal family

Voting in the commons is called a DIVISION

Whip – makes sure the members of their own party is voting for what they are supposed to be

Free Vote – whips cannot get involved – although free votes are rare

New laws have to be approved by both houses of Parliament (except tax raising)

If disagreement between the houses then the House of Commons has the power as they represent the people

Making a law:
Green to White
1) First reading – goes to parliament
2) Second reading – debate
3) Committee stage – experts from the field give opinions (fine tuning)
4) Report stage
5) Third reading – more debate (possible amendments)
6) House of Lords – whips go around as there will be a vote
7) Consideration of lords amendments
8) Royal assent – Queen signs it off

House of Lords was the final court of appeal until October 2009, now taken over by supreme court – distinction needed between government and law

Karl Marx

Karl Marx was a German philosopher, empiricist and economist. He began his life as a top law student and to the surprise of his family, friends and tutors; he switched to philosophy and journalism. He had many theories on how and why the problems of society existed, however his theories on solving these problems were somewhat naïve and a little un-realistic.

Marx believed that man is the productive animal, and was the master of the world basically because of his use of tools and the fact that he is able to co-operate and live. He also believed that if you managed to grasp the economy, then it would be the key to understanding the human life. This is the reason that he based most of his theories and conclusions on the collection of masses of statistics and evidence. Marx is notably known for going to the British Library every day collecting data such as demographics, wages, prices of commodities, price of housing and price of bread; this was similar to that of Darwin. He then drew out conclusions from this empirical data to how life would evolve, being the first economist to do so.

For someone who was interested in these sorts of things, he had a strong dislike for philosophy and he believed that philosophers done nothing to change the world, they only interpret it. You can actually read on his tombstone ‘philosophers have only interpreted the world – the point however is to change it’.

Marx was fond of Hegel’s theory of materialism in his dialectics. This was basically that Marx believed that in the future there would be a war between the two opposing ends of society: the bourgeoisie (rich) and the proletariat (poor). He believed that the poor would overcome the rich, introducing a socialist system where everyone was equal. What this meant for the economy would be that production would now benefit society as oppose to the market. Although this is a good theory on paper there were clear flaws with this sort of communist theory.

It can be argued that Marx did not understand human nature in that it would not be as smooth as everyone settling down in to this Utopian society, ready to be equals with each other, without any central government or religion. Firstly without a central government and rules, there would be huge amounts of disorder and the country would soon spiral out of control. Secondly, people just DO NOT give up religion, to a lot of people their religion is so important, it is worth dying for, so to eradicate religion for a communist world is virtually impossible.

Without the feel of personal gain and improvement, people would start to get lazy and start to feel un-motivated to pull their weight. This is another major flaw in the theory in that if one person sees another not working as hard as they are but reaping the same benefits, they are going to quickly follow suit, which in turn would result in the decline of the economy.

Prometheus and romanticism

Romanticism comes from the late 18th to the early 19th century, which involves the move away from the preceding age of reason, which focuses on liberalism and the belief that every person should be free to live how he or she want without being blinded by society. The Romantics loved the idea of nature and the natural life and as Jean Jacques Rousseau said ‘man is born free, but everywhere is in chains’.

Prometheus was seen as a titan in Greek Mythology; a titan is someone who is not human but is also not a God, he is a giant like creature. He was one who revolted against this Kings and stole fire from them and brought it down to Earth where he created the first humans from clay. He was then punished in a cruel way, having defied the Gods, he was chained to a rock and had his liver pecked out by a bird; everyday his liver would grow back, meaning never ending suffering and torture. He was the champion of oppressed human kind.

Prometheus is therefore seen as the founder or the God of romanticism. He is referred to in different names such as the ‘bringer of fire’. He was seen as the earliest form of opposition to society and the Kings in that he was a rebel to their world. Philosophers such as Jean Jacques Rousseau would have loved Prometheus in that he was fighting for the freedom of the naturalistic world, and to not have Gods rule over. It is clear that he was an influential figure in that so many works have been written because of him such as Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein that was sub-titled ‘modern Prometheus’.

Percy Shelley wrote a sonnet called ‘Ozymandias’:

I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said, ‘Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them on the sand
Half-sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed;
And on the pedestal these words appear:
“My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings,
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!”
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

‘Ozymandias’ is seen as someone who has fought against a tyrannical power in the face of oppression, similar to that of Prometheus. ‘The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed’, so these are the oppressive rulers who have led to Ozymandias being defeated. We know he has been forced to suffer, just like a typical romantic would, ‘half-sunk, a shattered visage’.

The idea of Prometheus was that he stole the fire to create man, which is also seen as romantic, as the romantics have a notion of making or creating things, hence the creation of the bust of Rameses II, which inspired Shelley to write this sonnet.


John Keats wrote a poem called ‘Ode on a Grecian Urn’

http://www.bartleby.com/101/625.html (Link to the poem)

Straight away from the title of the poem we can see that the idea of romanticism was great, in that the poet is in awe of the urn, something that is created or made. This again links back to the idea that romantics loved the idea of creation. Staying with the idea of creativity, it is highly evident in the poem that Keats is trying to give across this romantic ideal in that the urn is personified as a bride, something you associate with beauty and elegance.

Final Cut Pro/TV Filming training

So after having camera training and editing training we were told to go out and film anything for criticism in this Thursday's lecture to make sure we were picking up the basics (at least). I decided to go to a local leisure centre where I interviewed a martial arts instructor about what they do and what it is all about.

Filming:

We were told certain things about filming, and rules that should be followed. For instance the 'rule of thirds' by which the person your interviewing's eyes must be a third in and a third down whilst looking to one side (not directly at the camera). We also ere told how to focus the camera, and complete a white balance so the colours dont come out dodgy. We were also advised to always use a gun-mic and not rely on the mic that came with the video camera, however due to high demand there were none available.

One of my flaws after watching back the video is that I done my interview in front of a window (not directly in front but the sun was so bright from the outside it creates a blur on the side of the picture.

After importing my video in to final cut pro, I was told that my video was not rendered. We hadn't come across this in any lectures or training sessions although after a quick look on google I managed to find out that it was easily remedied. Saying this, once the video was rendered the sound began to stutter slightly, i'm sure I will find out why and how this happened.

So here is my video, all other criticisms are welcome bearing in mind this is the first video interview I have made!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-McvCeMGjmI

J'Accuse - The Dreyfus Affair

Alfred Dreyfus was a man who became a scapegoat for the French Army in one of the biggest miscarriages of justice ever to be seen. At the time just before Dreyfus fell victim, he was in the French Army and was quickly moving his way up the ladder and becoming a more and more important figure. France had just lost the German/Franco war, although at the time there was no Germany, it was known as Prussia, made up of German states. This was a huge embarrassment for the French in that along with the loss they had to give up Alsace and Lorraine, two states, as well as part with a huge sum of money for the Prussians war efforts, and to rub salt into the wound, they had to sit back and allow the Prussians to hold a celebration parade throughout Paris. Consequently, France were out to get revenge, and began creating empires in Asia and Africa, to rebuild their respect and pride.

The Panama Canal Scandal - This is often pointed at as the reason for such anti-semiticsm in France. This was the event that saw up to a billion francs lost after the French government took bribes, supposedly from Jewish men, to keep quiet about The Panama Canal Companies financial trouble. Dreyfus was a Jewish man who came from Alsace, one of the states that were taken over by the Prussians, both of which led to him becoming this scapegoat.

The Scandal:

The scandal it self was that at the time of the French trying to mount this comeback, and to try and get their revenge there was somebody who was giving the Germans details of future plans. Secret documents were found in a waste paper bin detailing these future plans about the French Army. Somebody was getting paid to be a traitor. Straight away the French looked for someone to frame, and of course with all the anti-semitism, it was a Jew that would fall foul, Alfred Dreyfus. He was found guilty and sent to 'Devil's Island', in which they built him a cell, where all he could see was the sky, he was shackled whilst he slept, given poor food, and had no form of exercise. He was furthermore humiliated as he was stripped of all his medals and his sword was snapped. When it is looked at logically, it can be clearly seen that Dreyfus had no reason to be a traitor:

1) He came from Alsace, which meant he was even more obsessed with recapturing the place where he came from back off the Germans.
2) He was extremely wealthy, so he did not need the money.
3) He was a very smart and intellectual person, so he would have known that being a traitor would have got him killed. (Although in the court case he was criticised for being so smart anyway)

In France at this time there was a strong divide between Rich and Poor, and the left/right political divide were extremely separated over the Dreyfus affair; the left being socialists and intellectuals who did not agree with the decisions, and the right bring the Army, Church and monarchists who believed that Dreyfus was the guilty party.

J'Accuse

Emile Zola is said to be one of the best journalists that ever lived, and it was he who wrote J'Accuse or I Accuse, which accused all of the guilty parties in the Dreyfus affair and pretty much told it as it really was. He accused many army officers, and government officials of covering up the truth that it was in fact a man named Esterhazy who was the culprit. He was a well known traitor/spy, and when it was brought up, the Army officer's dismissed it and wanted it kept quiet, with Dreyfus left to rot on Devils Island.

In J'Accuse, Zola begins by addressing the President as a great man, he is full of praise for him ('you have conquered hearts'), aside from this one event or 'blemish' as he calls it. He even believes that the President could not have even known about this travesty, as it has been hidden from him. He speaks s strongly about Esterhazy's guilt 'a council of war, under order, has dared to acquit Esterhazy'.

He accuses firstly the man who was put in charge of the investigation, Lieutenant Colonel Du Paty de Clam. 'Forzinetti describes to us as armed with a dark lantern, wanting to approach the sleeping defendant, to flood his face abruptly with light and to thus surprise his crime'. The way in which he has described the blaming of Dreyfus by Du Paty de Clam, can be seen as to be mysterious or like he creeped up on him to plant this crime on him. Zola describes de Clam as 'inventing' Dreyfus for the crime, and he is extremely incensed with the way in which he has pinned the blame on the innocent. He publishes that Dreyfus was arrested in secret by Du Paty and that he forces Dreyfus' wife to keep quiet otherwise he would kill Dreyfus himself.

'Terrible denial of justice from which France is sick.' This is another strong quote as to how Zola feels about this miscarriage of justice. He may blame Du Paty for the birth of the affair but he also blames General Mercier, General De Boisdeffre and General Gonse for letting it happen.

Zola then questions why the case was behind closed doors, and how Du Paty had him found guilty, causing the public to whisper and talk of treason, causing them to be behind the public degradation of Dreyfus. Zola describes Du Paty's accusations as 'lunatic imaginations'. 'Hunting for the '"dirty Jews", which dishonours our time', here we can see that Zola disagrees with the anti-semitic views of the French Army and the right.


Zola often refers to the ones he accuses of having disturbed consciences, and that he knows that they know what they are hiding is wrong. He then begins to talk of the document that was found that pretty much guaranteed Esterhazy's role as the spy, and begins explaining how it was covered up and by whom: General Gonse, then General De Boisdeffre, then General Billot, were all there and did not want the truth getting out as Zola believed that 'the condemnation of Esterhazy inevitably involved the revision of Dreyfus's trial; and this, the High Command did not want at any cost.' So the Army and Du Paty would do just about anything to stop Esterhazy becoming known as the real traitor as it would inevitably prove Dreyfus' innocence. Major Picquart was the name of the person that stumbled across the truth and Zola praises him for doing all he can to convince his superiors to tell the truth about what really happened. To stop Picquart from revealing the truth Zola explains how he was sent on a mission that led him as far away as Tunisia. It is further explained how Esterhazy managed to escape the trial without being found guilty; and once again Zola feels it to be the work of Du Paty. He says that evidence that was held against Esterhazy was stolen and returned to the High Command.


Zola finishes with a final list of people that he accuses for what he describes as an abomination:
. Major Du Paty de Clam
. General Mercier
. General Billot
. General De Boisdeffre
. General De Pellieux
. 3 Handwriting experts: irs Belhomme, Varinard and Couard
. Offices of the war
. First council of war

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/J%27accuse - J'Accuse

Kant and Hegel

Immanuel Kant

Kant is the founder of German idealism. All German idealists have set characteristics; they believe in mind over matter, which supports previous empiricist philosophers such as Descartes (‘I think, therefore I am’). They reject the utilitarian way of life: the greatest good for the greatest number.

Throughout the majority of his life Kant lived in East Prussia, living through some historical events such as the Seven Years’ War (Russians occupied East Prussia), the French Revolution and part of Napoleon’s career. He was an extreme liberal who supported the French Revolution; there can be nothing more dreadful than that the actions of a man should be subject to the will of another’ – here he is saying that there is nothing worse than one mans actions being influenced by a force of another man and not being allowed to act out of own free will.

He began writing scientific works, such as a theory of earthquakes, but his most important scientific writings were his ‘General Natural History and Theory of the Heavens. It is not supported by any scientific proof but it sets an interesting hypothesis to the origins of the solar system, and suggests that each planet is in fact inhabited.

‘The Critique of Pure Reason’ is Kant’s most important book. The main purpose of the book is to prove that none of our knowledge can not be traced back to earlier memories, but is in fact a priori, so it rejects the ideas of people like Locke and other liberalists such as Mary Wollstonecraft, in that we are born with a blank slate, and all knowledge gained is purely gained from experience and knowledge. Kant does not agree that different types of knowledge are gained differently, where others believe that some knowledge gained, is via experience but this is in a synthetic proposition and analytical propositions are gained a priori. The examples that Russell gives in his book for analytical proposition is that ‘a tall man, is a man’, or ‘and equilateral triangle is a triangle’. On the other hand, a synthesised proposition is something like, a human plus a bird equals an angel. It was believed by some philosophers that the human and the bird are both a priori ideas that we are given, but the idea of the angel is a something we gain from experience and knowledge. Kant would have rejected this idea, and believed that all of our experiences are gained through an a priori proposition.




Immanuel Kant was the last influential philosopher in the theory of knowledge, following on from people we have covered such as Locke, Berkeley and Hume. Kant was a liberal thinker and his ideas on noumenal objects were supportive of those same ideas that Hume and Berkeley had. Kant believed that when you looked away from an object, or stopped perceiving it, it stayed there, but was not the same; when you begin perceiving the object it becomes phenomena. So if you were in a room with no windows and no doors, then Kant would have believed that anything outside of that room was different to what it would be if it were being perceived through a window. Berkeley had a similar notion in that he believed when you do not perceive something it does not exist, or that it flashes in and out of existence, Berkeley believed that God was to blame for this. This would have been because at the times of his philosophy, anything un-explainable was considered an act of God. Hume, however believed that there is no causation in nature, only in our minds the objects are there; anything that you can see is in one’s eyes only. In Kant’s morality something is only good if it can be legislated as a universal law. This was in opposition to utilitarianism, which is the greatest good for the greatest number. Kant would believe that making all the money would bring all the pleasure. However, utilitarianism would reject this notion, as not everyone can be rich. The morality by which Kant lived by also included the theory that any kind of lie is bad, and that the whole World ending would be better than someone telling a lie. So telling an axe murderer where your friends are so he can kill them would be better than lying to save them. Regardless of the outcome, the intent one has is most important. Kant believed that if you were doing something morally right in order to gain respect than it was wrong, but if you were doing something morally right, just because you know it is morally right than it is a good thing.


Hegel

Russell portrays Hegel as an extremely important figure when it comes to the movement of German philosophy. Although this is true, he also makes it extremely apparent that his success is a lot due to previous works of Kant. He states that Hegel had an extreme influence in Germany, and also producing ‘Hegelians’ throughout the world. Hegel is definitely a romantic, and is against the ideas of previous empiricists. ‘What to the empiricist appear to be facts are, and must be, irrational’.


He believed in the unreality of separateness, so the world was not a collection of ‘hard unit’ but more a real as a whole. He believed the whole, or the world, to be a more complex system or organism, as oppose to a simple substance, which previous philosophers such as Spinoza had argued. He believes that each component that the world is made up of is not an illusion but each holds its own value of importance. These were some of his earlier views, and this could have something to do with the fact that he had an early interest in mysticism.

The whole – ‘The absolute’ – Hegel

Logic and metaphysics to Hegel is the same thing, but the word ‘logic’ means something different to him, then it commonly means to anyone else. Russell uses a quite confusing example to explain Hegel’s philosophy of reality: ‘Mr A is an uncle; but if you were to say that the universe is an uncle, you would land yourself in difficulties. An uncle is a man who has a nephew, and the nephew is a separate person from the uncle; therefore an uncle cannot be the whole of reality.’ This again links back to his idea of the unreality of separateness.

Knowledge is a triadic movement (three fold):
1) Sense perception – awareness of the object
2) Sceptical criticism – becomes purely subjective
3) Self knowledge – subject and object are no longer distinct

Hegel believes that ‘falsehoods’ and ‘truths’ are not as clear-cut opposite as we are led to believe. Nothing we know is either wholly true or false, ‘we can know in a way that it is false’. This is done when we attach truth to a piece of information, which is true in a sense but not in a philosophical sense, for ‘truth is a whole’ and nothing partial is therefore true.

Hegel’s philosophy is extremely unique in that it is quite contradictory: He argues that communal living is a good thing, or the communist lifestyle, however, he also argues that free will can only be granted if you own your own property. He, like Kant, is against the utilitarian approach supported by philosophers such as J.S.Mill (grandson of Jeremy Bentham, creator of utilitarianism). They instead promote this more independent type of freedom. Hegel does however criticise some aspects of liberal freedom in that he believes the needs of one person can harm another, so therefore certain freedoms should not be granted.

There are differences between Kant and Hegel. Kant supports previous ideas put forward such as that of Descartes, in that the human minds are not able to understand certain subjects, similarly to that of an ant not being able to understand a human, whereas Hegel believes that although this is the case now, there may be a time when the human brain has complete understanding.

Mary Wollstonecraft

Mary Wollstonecraft had a very hard early life, her father was obsessed with public standing, which led to his inevitable downfall, and she was forced to work as a governess in Ireland for extremely poor pay. She had an extreme passion for education and most importantly, giving women the same education as men. She believed that women were only given this education by which they were taught superficial things such as how to cook, clean or sew; the things that were expected of a woman in those days. She believed that women ere entitled to a freedom of knowledge and that they should be given the equality of opportunity. In Mary's opinion, women were too quick to accept this education, and she was in general critical of women as a whole, and not men, who may have been seen as the people to implement this method of education.

Wollstonecraft would have supported John Locke's theory that the human has nothing in their mind to start off with, and that everybody starts with this 'blank slate'. The majority of men at the time would have believed this applied only to men, whereas Locke and Wollstonecraft believed it to be all humans. She published her first book, 'Thoughts on the Education of Daughters', this was described as a 'self-help' book that gave women advice on not only how not to accept the conventions of education, but also gave etiquette and morality advice, as well as guidelines on how to care for infants.

Another philosopher who intrigued Wollstonecraft was Jean-Jacques Rousseau; even though she was in awe of him she was also critical of him; Mary was fully supportive of the French Revolution and the tearing down of the old regime, which was mainly driven by Rousseau, however, she had previously pleaded with the leaders of revolutionary France to ignore Rousseau's views of women and to grant them full equality.

Wollstonecraft's most famous publication was the Vindication of the Rights of Women; this was diagnosis of the current state of female manners, and was not an attack on society for treating women the way they did, but rather aimed at middle class women to ask them why they were accepting these conventions. It metaphorically put a mirror in front of the female population, and was seen as a well needed wake up call. The vindication was given a very warm response.


• Wollstonecraft argues that men are given a ‘birthright’ to fight oppression whereas women are not given the same birthright but they instead despise the freedom that men have. Saying this she also says that ‘they (women) have not sufficient virtue to struggle to attain’ – so she is saying that even though women want this given right to be able to considered equal to men, they are reluctant to fight for it.

• ‘Men have, probably, been led by viewing education in a false light’ – she goes on to say that men see education as something to prepare you for life, whereas it should be seen as a step towards perfection and it is for this reason that women in Wollstonecraft’s opinion are not given equal education. They are taught to cook/clean/sew etc.
• Wollstonecraft describes women as ‘slaves’.

• She believes that, what she describes as female ‘folly and vice’, stems from people being narrow minded. The government produce obstacles, which prevent female understanding and therefore leave them to remain inferior to the male species.

• She describes women as ‘weak beings’ – she blames not just men and society for bringing down the female species but more the women in the world for adhering to these beliefs therefore not giving themselves a chance.

• She even seems to become frustrated in her writing: ‘Ah! Why do women, I write with affectionate solicitude, condescend to receive a degree of attention and respect from strangers.’ She is asking why is it that women are forced to give even strange men their attention and respect even though when a man and a man meet this is not the case. She is angry it seems at all females for making themselves this way.

• To me it seems as though Wollstonecraft sees women as these robotic beings that a controlled or used as a puppet by men. It is as if they are born from a machine or that they are man made, so much so that they are not willing to break the mould. This is what Wollstonecraft sees women as, in that they are all forced to be the same sort of character and she wants them to break out and stop complying with the in-equalities.

• I think that Wollstonecraft is annoyed by the way in which women are also treated in society when it comes to things like men opening doors for women: ‘I scarcely am able to govern my muscles, when I see a man start with eager, and serious solicitude to lift a handkerchief, or shut a door, when the lady could have done it herself, had she only moved a pace or two.’ So basically she thinks that if a woman is shown to need the man to do such things for her, she is allowing herself to become a lesser figure. What she wants is for a woman to act exactly the same as a man, and open doors for herself, or pick up a hander kerchief for herself.

• Wollstonecraft sets her main wish to be that she wants there to be no distinctions between a man and a woman in society unless it is shown via love or a relationship; only then can we see who is the ‘male’ and ‘female’.

• She believes that certain women have received this ‘masculine’ education, and therefore gone on to acquire great courage and resolution, therefore proving her point that females are not inferior to males if given the right tools to succeed. If they are not given the opportunity, and they are forced to abide to the stereotypical ideals, then they are not able to show the equality.

News Agenda

News Agenda

The I paper:

The ‘I’ is a new paper, which comes from the same people that produce the Independent. It has been introduced to give a more condensed version of its ‘mother’ paper, for the people who have little time during the day to get their news, such as commuters or businessmen and women. It has been described as a better alternative to the free newspapers, such as the Metro. The first edition was published on the 26th October 2010, so it is yet to have any exact figures of circulation or it’s audience.

It seems to be more interested in the economy and money judging by the order of news. On the 18th November the front page story was that of a ‘boom’ in auction houses, and it explained that even though the world is in recession, there is still millions being spent. Similarly, the next day, the front page was that of how tax money was being spent. The Royal engagement was set back as far as page six, like the Independent, showing its lack of interest in the Royal family. In contrast, the Daily Mail thought it was important to put information on the Royal wedding on the front page.

Another one of the main stories in the ‘I’ was that of the UK’s ‘bailing out’ of Ireland financially, again showing its interest in the economy. In comparison, the Daily Mail set this story back on page four, which is still high up the order, however it chose to publish a story about benefit thieves before.

Radio Breeze:

Radio Breeze is a local radio station in Hampshire, with three different stations covering 3 different areas: Portsmouth, Chichester and Isle of Wight; Southampton and New Forest; and Winchester and North Hampshire. The type of music is the ‘feel good’ kind. The type of artists you would find would be Michael Buble, Gloria Estefan or Matt Monro. The tag line of Breeze is ‘the smoothest sounds in the South’ which gives you an idea of the genre of music to be expected.

There is some information on the website about Breeze’s target audience, explaining that it targets 35-64 year olds, and that it has a slight female bias. Like the ‘I’ paper, it claims to be targeted at those who lead a busy life, so they can come home at the end of a busy day and ‘chill-out’.

The news on Breeze is very brief and is generally local. Stories found ranged from people being jailed around the area, to robberies and local sport. It also takes some time to discuss news from all over the United Kingdom, such as the Royal wedding – although it was more about the hope of an extra days bank holiday. There were on average 6-7 stories in each bulletin, lasting around 3-4 minutes. The main story would last around the one minute mark, and then the rest ranging from 15 seconds – 40 seconds, depending on whether or not they have a piece of audio to go with it.