Seminar Notes - Keynes

This week was a change of pace in the HCJ side of the course and we learned about economics. I have to admit that prior to the lecture and seminar, I had absolutely no idea about the details of economics and had heard of Keynes but did not know what his economic theory was. The following are brief notes about Keynes from the reading and seminar.

• John Maynard Keynes's magnum opus was The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money.
• Keynes wrote during a time of mass unemployment, waste and suffering.
• He highlighted the failures of capitalism as being surprisingly narrow and technical, as were the causes of mass unemployment.

There are four key points of The General Theory:

1. Economies can and often do suffer from an overall lack of demand, which leads to involuntary unemployment.
2. The economy's automatic tendency to correct shortfalls in demand, if it exists at all, operates slowly and painfully.
3. Government policies to increase demand, by contrast, can reduce government unemployment quickly.
4. Sometimes, increasing the money supply won't be enough to persuade the private sector to spend more, and government spending must step into the breach.

At the time these ideas were radical and unthinkable.

• Keynes believed that the then conventional view about the relationship between wages and employment involved a fallacy of composition.
• Keynes needed to 'provide an alternative construction.'
• He appreciated the power of the reigning orthodoxy.
• He believed it was naive to believe a fall in wages can increase employment
• He made a crucial innovation with the demolition of Say's Law.
• He tried to explain why the economy sometimes operates below full employment; given that overall demand is depressed - how can we create more employment?
• Keynes believed that changes in the quantity of money can affect the rate of interest and through the rate of interest can affect aggregate demand.
• The General Theory was written in a monetary environment where interest rates stayed close to zero.
• Keynes believed that the conditions of the 1930s would persist indefinitely - he was wrong.
• His consumption function is grounded in psychological observation rather than intertemporal optimization.
• Keynes mistook an episode for a trend.
• He underestimated the ability of mature economies to starve off deminishing returns.
• Persistant inflation has kept interest rates high and monetary policy effective.

Hicks interpreted The General Theory in two curves:

1. The IS curve - shifted by changes in taxes and spending
2. The LM curve - shifted by changes in money supply.

• Keynes wrote during the Depression when other economists took a socialist stance
• He rejected Say's Law - which stated that supply creates demand aka supply side economics.
• Gross domestic product (GDP) is the total value of market prices on all goods.
• A recession is when the national GDP decreases for 3/4 of the year.
• When this happens for two or more years consecutively it is a depression.
• Economic growth must be faster than the demographic (population increase)
• A larger population and less money results in unemployment and poverty.
• Unemployment is the cause and result of negative economic growth.
• Full employment would equal economic growth.
• According to Classical Economists government causes unemployment.
• According to Keynes lack of demand causes unemployment.
• Keynes said that the answer would be to just print money and give it to people - the multiplier effect.

WINOL Critical Reflection: 16/11/11

Headlines: The headline clips this week once again looked professional. In particular, I thought that the clip from the football match was interesting and of a very high quality. The only criticism this week was that, in the clip of Caret, it would have been better if a clip without subtitles was used in the headlines because it was confusing to watch.

Unemployment: As Becky explained in the debrief, she was not given much warning at all to write a script for this piece which resulted in an overuse of statistics, however given more time this would probably not have been the case. I thought it was good how Gareth asked if the unemployment statistics could be broken down locally, because that is really what the audience would be most interested in. It would have been better to start with this question rather than the general statistics, although again I understand this was probably due to lack of time. When watching this I was slightly confused as to whether Becky had memorised the script, or whether she was only looking at the autocue extremely subtly. If she had memorised it then that is very impressive, but I thought that it looked a bit unprofessional to not be looking either at the camera or Gareth. It also gave the impression that she was not getting the information from anywhere other than her own memory which, as a consequence, made me unsure on how accurate the information was.

Unions: I thought that Lou's piece this week was very good, however I still think that he needs to slow down on his voice overs so that it is a bit easier to follow what he is saying. The interview with Royston Smith was a bit wonky but was otherwise well framed. The interview with Mike Tuckett would have been better if Tuckett had known where to look because he looked a bit shifty and like a deer caught in the headlights. However Lou said this was because he was a very difficult interviewee. Other than that, Lou framed the shot perfectly. I thought that once again this week Lou's piece to camera was an improvement since his first attempts earlier this year - he just needs to check his collar is straight!

Paedophile: I thought that the link to this piece was well written and professional, highlighting the seriousness of what would be coming next. I liked how Flick zoomed in on the photo of the convicted man because it looked to be more than a still image; she had clearly taken on board the suggestions about using still images from her piece on Antarctica a few weeks ago. I felt that the piece would have been stronger if Flick had had a more serious tone to her voice, however I understand how difficult the piece was and that this was the first time she had to cover such a serious piece. Flick did incredibly well to avoid any accidental deffamation or accidently breaking the anonymity of the victim. By showing the picture of the guilty man and naming him, Flick ensured that she positively indentified him so that no one with the same name could claim that she defamed them. Victims of sexual assult have anonymity for life, and as the man had been a neighbour of the victim, Flick made sure that she did not give the man's address because this could have revealed the identity of the victim.

Parking: I thought that Lee did well finding shots that were not boring for this story when all he really had to work with was a car park - and he was not allowed to film any license plates without the owner's permission. I thought that the interview with Alan Rickman was well framed and the sound quality was good. In the debrief Lee explained how he had managed to grab George Beckett in the street to get the interview. I thought that this was extremely professional, and even though it was not framed well well, you could hear what Beckett was saying and could see him clearly which is the most important thing. Brian suggested that a way to make this piece stonger would have been to film the carpark for 10 or 15 minutes as cars come in and out and then speed up the footage when editing it.

Mobile App: The piece about the university introducing a mobile app was brilliant to include as the majority of viewers are students at the univeristy so it was directly relevant to them. Unfortunately the video and sound quality in this piece were not good at all, although this could have been due to technical problems.

Football: As usual, the football news this weeek was very strong. However, as Brian explained, the main point of the piece should have been about how the hatrick was the fastest ever scored by a substitute (at least that is what I gathered the fact was!) because this would have been a genuinely interesting fact even to people who do not take an interest in football. The interviews in this piece were well framed and to a high standard. The promo for Sports Week in the bulliten was extremely confusing, it would have been better to show clips from the packages in Sports Week instead of showing the presenter.

Radio: The shot at the start of this piece was really good, and a definite step up for Tom. It was brave of him to think outside the box and do a close up shot, and it paid off! It was confusing in the piece to have the interview with Aarran Summers as a voice over instead of an actual shot of him which would have been more interesting to watch. The interview with Joyce Carter was good and well framed. The interview with Maxine was brilliant, really well framed and interesting, and Tom made sure she was looking the opposite way to Carter.

Presenter: This was the first time I had seen Gareth presenting and I thought he did really well, especially as he ensured he had a different tone for the news than for when he is presenting the sports.

Critical Reflection: Would you rather?

I had the idea for this piece because my mum sent me a poster listing the Dalai Lama's 'Instructions for Life'. I knew that I wanted to the piece to end with my suggestions of similar instructions, but ones written by a young person for a young person because this is not something that I have seen done before; most wisdom is passed from older generations to younger ones.

I was having difficulty trying to find an opening to piece because I didn't want to jump straight into questioning why wisdom is only passed down generations instead of up or horizontally!

When playing 'would you rather' with my friends, and someone posed the question 'would you rather skip 10 years into the future or 10 years back in the past?' I knew it would be the perfect way to lead into my column this week. I have to say I was surprised to find so many of my friends had regrets, and more suprised by the fact that when I actually stopped to think I realised I had regrets as well.

I did not want this piece to be comical because I did not feel comfortable trying to make light of the fact that people my age already have regrets about their relatively short lives to date. I decided to compose 10 'instructions' because I felt that 5 were not enough, but the 19 from the Dalai Lama were too many.

I created the instructions by thinking about the things I regret, or wish that I hadn't worried about so much, on the assumption that other young people worry about similar things. I did not want the instructions to be really deep and meaningful about life, in the way that an adult would, instead I wanted to make them simple and directly relatable to the lives of teenagers today.

I am really happy with the piece, particularly because it was a change of pace from my usual, sarcastic mocking columns.

Diary of a Winchester Lady: Would you rather?

This week my friends and I engaged in a game of ‘Would you rather?’ the game which offers two hypothetical situations and players must pick which of the two situations they would rather do. Amongst the proposed situations of having a toucan beak attached permanently to your face and losing half of your body, someone posed the question ‘would you rather re-live the past 10 years of your life or skip 10 years ahead into the future?’

The answer was unanimous; we would all rather re-live the past ten years of our lives. For all of us playing the game, this was not out of fear of missing the next ten years, it was out of a desire to correct our mistakes and resolve our regrets. With all of us being less than 23 years old, it was quite surprising that we already wish we had the chance to do our lives over.

There is no shortage in our society of nuggets of wisdom passed down through generations, of inspirational stories of how to overcome adversity or the best way to learn from our mistakes. But where is the information that prevents us from having regrets before we even begin our independent adult lives?

In my room I have a poster of Instructions for Life as stated by the Dalai Lama, including:

Judge your success by what you had to give up to get it

Share you wisdom; it is a way to achieve immortality

I am inspired by the wisdom on the poster, but found that the instructions for life read more like instructions for reflecting on your life, accepting the regrets and appreciating the lessons life has taught you rather than helping you not to end up with regrets.

An alternative set of life instructions are found in Baz Lurman’s song ‘Wear Sunscreen’; an attempt to set out guidelines for younger generations to try and live by throughout their adult lives. So while the Dalai Lama offers instructions for coping with the past, and Baz Lurman offers instructions for coping with the future – where are the instructions that will help us with the present?

As my teenage years draw to a close, I have decided to create a list of instructions to help teenagers with the challenges of a modern life.

1.       Do not break the rules unless you fully understand them.

2.       Ask questions. Do not waste your time guessing answers.

3.       Your parents will never be as angry at you as you image they will be.

4.       Only make friends with the people you like, not the people you think you should like.

5.        Do not fear disapproval from teachers. They are only ordinary people.

6.        The memory of a bad night out is better than no memory of a good one.

7.       Remember that logging in online means logging out of reality. The internet will always be around – family and friends will not.

8.       Be an individual if you want to.

9.       Be a lemming if you want to.

10.   Do not follow these instructions if you know you can make better ones for yourself.

WINOL Critical Reflection 09/11/11

Headlines: I thought that the headlines this week were really strong. There was a good soundbite, a punchy script, and I like the natural sound on the graduate and fencing pieces.

Student Protests: I thought that it was really good that Tom had actually gone to London to report on the protests. His piece to camera was once again good and was easy to understand. He also made sure he only gave the facts, not any comments. I thought that the piece could have been stronger if he had interviewed one of the protesters, or had some footage of the protests rather than a piece to camera for the whole package. The sound quality could also have been improved, but you were able to hear him so it was not too bad!

Chris Huhne: I thought that the interview with Chris Huhne was well framed, and had a good sound quality. He did not give any of the facts, only comment, which is exactly what Chris and Brian have been stressing is essential to get right. I also thought that the footage from the debate was good because Julie managed to get a good soundbite of Huhne, and a close up shot which looked professional.

Housing: The shots that Lou had for this package were relevant and surprisingly varied given the availability of shots that would have been relevant to the piece. I thought that his voice over would have been better if he had talked a bit slower because I found it difficult to follow what he was saying. The interview with George Beckett was well framed, although it seemed as though the camera was looking down on him a little bit - but this may be a misconception on my part! I thought that the interview was a huge improvement from Lou's first interview where he was talking to the woman in the care home, because he had a close up even though Beckett was sitting down. The cut aways were confusing in this piece because they were shots of Beckett, while Beckett was being interviewed. It would have been better if Lou had been able to find a cut away of someone or something else.

I do not think that the interview with Patrick Davies was particularly well framed because he was central, the top of his head was out of shot, and the camera was too far away from him.

I thought that Lou's piece to camera was much better this week, and can tell he had made an effort to make sure he was looking up throughout it!

Occupy Bournemouth and Bin Updates: I thought it was good that updates were given to the viewer on both the occupy Bournemouth and bin collection stories. The shots for both updates were relevant and well framed.

Primary Schools: I really like the opening shot of this package. Over the shoulder shots have not really been used on WINOL so far this year, so it was a refreshing change. The shots around the classroom were a bit unsteady. The interview with Rory Perry was well framed and the sound quality was excellent. Lee did well in making sure that the second person he interviewed was facing the opposite was to Perry. I also liked how the final show was of a pound sign on the smart board, which was relevant to the story.

Sport: The Olympic Torch story was a refreshing change to the usual football updates. It was a story that would probably be of interest to people who do not particularly like sports because it is a momentous event happening in the local area. I really like the graphics showing the route of the Torch, I thought it looked really professional. However, Mikey needed to be stood slightly more to the left of the screen so that the viewer could see the entire map. There was a noticeable sound problem at the start of the piece, but this was resolved quickly.

The fencing piece was good, and again a nice change from the football. I am not sure if I liked the fact that Mikey introduced the package himself after talking about the Olympic Torch. I think it would have been better for Cara to introduce the piece. I liked the natural sound in the fencing piece, and you could still hear Mikey well. The interview with Jon Rhodes was well framed in the sense that he was not completely central in the shot. However I think it would have been better if he had not been looking so straight on to the camera. Normally I would suggest a tighter shot, but in this case I liked that you could see the Olympic badge Rhodes was wearing.

The football footage was once again of a very high standard this week.

Graduation: Flick got some really good shots of the graduates for this piece. I really like the angle she found about the identical twins with identical degrees, which added something more to the piece rather than just a normal graduation story. I liked the shot of the procession, including the Major because it was directly related to what Flick was talking about in the voice over. Like Lee, Flick made sure the second person she interviewed was looking the opposite way to the first one.

Presenting: I thought that George did a really excellent job of presenting WINOL for the first time. He looked professional, had a good pace to his voice and his hands did not look awkward! Well done George!

Critical Reflection: Confused and Concerned

Initially my idea for this column had been to go to the torchlight procession and write about better uses of money than fireworks, or about the stereotypically members of the public who attend events such as this. However as soon as I saw the torches being handed out and being given to children I decided that it would be better to change the angle of my column.

The issue of health and safety is something that is often in the media, but more often than not policies draw media attention because they are overly cautions. I thought that writing about the total absence of health and safety would make my piece more interesting because it would be different to what the reader would expect.

I wanted to include some ridiculous health and safety rules with the piece to act as a contrast to the violations I had seen at the event. At first I included the examples in this way:

It seems absurd to me that in a world where children are not allowed to play conkers without safety goggles, take a pencil case into the classroom or use floatation devices, that they were being allowed to hold flaming torches.

I was not happy with the way I had done this because I felt that what I had written was too lengthy and did not read as dramatically or humorously as it could do. For this reason, I decided to start the piece with the extreme health and safety rules. I did this so that the reader would expect the column to be another piece about how out of control health and safety rules have become, and would then be surprised to find it is actually about the lack of health and safety.

I chose to state the health and safety rules in a FAQ style. I did this because I thought it would be more interested to read than a block of text stating the rules. The first three questions should make the reader expect the answers to be yes, and the fact that the answers are no would make the reader assume that the answer to the last question would definitely be no.

I thought it would be a good idea to include the fact that, even at 19, I found the torches difficult and dangerous to carry to give a sense of how dangerous it would be for a child to be holding one. I described the children as 'weaving through the crowds, in a hyped up, squealing frenzy holding what one child described as a "fire gun"' to highlight the chaos of the situation, which added to the danger. I decided to include one child's description of the torch as a 'fire gun' to make the point that the children were aware of how dangerous what they were carrying were, and that, at least that one child, was intending to use it as a weapon in his game.

When describing the father who had his child up on his shoulders, I made the comparison of the child's jacket to making him look like 'the Michelin Man'. I thought that this would be a comical comparison, as most readers will recognise the image of the Michelin Man, and would then be able to picture the jacket I was describing even if they had never seen a child in one before.

I ended the piece by describing my genuine confusion between whether it would have been better to health and safety regulations in that situation, or whether it was better to let people have one night where they could be careless. I did this partly to share my feelings about the whole night and partly to get the reader to think about whether it is better to try and prevent accidents or to just live carelessly and deal with accidents if they occur.

Diary of a Winchester Lady: Confused and Concerned

Health and Safety FAQs:

Am I allowed to let my child play with conkers?

Response: You may only allow your child to play a game of conkers if they are wearing the appropriate safety goggles.

Is my child allowed to use a floatation device in a public swimming pool?

Response: No your child may not use a floatation device because if the float knocks into another swimmer it could cause them to drown.

Is my child allowed to bring a pencil case to school?

Response: No your child may not bring a pencil case into school in case they try to hide sharp objects like scissors or a pencil sharpener in it.

Am I allowed to let my child carry a flaming torch through the streets with thousands of other people, with no safety goggles, no safety instructions and no supervision?

Response: Yes of course, it’s bonfire night

In our cotton wool society where children can hardly blink without us worrying that they are over exerting themselves, or putting unnecessary pressure on their eyeballs, I was stunned by the complete disregard for health and safety at the torch light parade last weekend. Flaming torches were handed out to adults, and children alike, with no safety warnings or instructions on how to make sure you did not burn yourself or those around you.

Initially I thought the idea of holding a torch sounded fantastic, and like hundreds of other, battled my way through the crowds to ensure I would be able to get one. And then almost instantaneously I regretted the decision and wanted to put it out. At 19, I was the youngest of my friends there than night, and as adults we were all extremely cautious not to accidently set someone alight while dodging the burning embers that were showering down on us. Each of us began to wonder what on earth had made us think it was going to be a good idea.

Meanwhile children as young as three and four were weaving through the crowds, in a hyped up, squealing frenzy holding what one child described as a “fire gun.” I can only imagine that the aspect of danger to their games, in comparison the bombardment of safety regulations in other aspects of their lives, was enough to make them completely out of control. They raced through hoards of adults, holding their torches high, annoying at eye level with most of the adults. This is of course with the exception of the child still in a buggy, waving a torch around which was more likely to set fire to someone’s knees than their hair.

The parents who allowed their children to run around with torches may have had no concern for health and safety, but one father quite literally took his disregard for safety to new heights. He thought nothing of carrying his child on his shoulders through the parade. This may not have been such a bad idea if the boy had not been wearing one of those bright orange, highly flammable jackets, the ones that make children look like the Michelin man. The father had raised his child to flame height, in a flammable jacket, in a crowd of thousands, a health and safety nightmare. But nothing happened.

The night had health and safety violations left, right and centre and still nothing happened. To this day I still cannot decide whether I am more shocked that children were allowed to run around with flaming torches, or impressed that for at least one night genuinely no one cared about the health and safety laws that dominate society.

Critical Reflection: Gratuitously Convoluted Language

So far this is the column which has taken the most research. I downloaded and read over 50 UK university prospectuses to find the best examples of unnecessarily over complicated language. I also sent for prospetuses through the post so that I would be able to photograph the covers to use as an image to go with the column.

In my first draft I named the universities I had found the quotes from. After talking it through with Katie, the features editor, she suggested that it would be best to leave out the university names because the comments could be seen as defamatory. So I changed the piece to be more generalised about UK universities in order to avoid this problem. I also made sure that when I took the photographs of the prospectus covers that the name of the universities were not visible.

I tried to make this piece as comical as possible because I think would be something that the readers could relate to. This is because the audience for the WINOL features site is largely current, past or prospective university students, presumably all of whom will have read prospectuses which choosing a university. I had written a different column for this week but, as Katie pointed out, it made more sense to use this one first because it ties in with university open days and students making university applications.

I have found that I am starting to create a style for my column, largely social commentary which I attempt to make comical when appropriate. Katie's feedback on my pieces has been invaluable, and has helped shaped my written style.

Diary of a Winchester Lady: Gratuitously Convoluted Language (AKA: Unnecessarily Complicated Words)

‘We value freedom, justice, truth, human rights and collective effort for the public good.’ This statement seems as though it should be written on the welcome mat outside a house containing all the superheroes of the world, or at the very least in the job description of the police force.  It is not a description that is normally associated with university students. It is included in the values of a UK university; but I highly doubt that the students spend their days performing vigilante acts of justice.

I started looking through different university prospectuses and found the exaggerations did not end with the values sections. For example, one university promoted that ‘there is a strong café and restaurant culture’, or in other words, people eat food there.

There is also a new development, The Human Movement Centre. Are only allowed to make movements in this particular building? Must we remain static around all other areas of the campus? I can picture it now, students who are seeking justice and working towards ‘the public good’ on patrol around the campus making sure no human movements are being made outside the designated centre, storming classes where students are raising their hands, paving over the sport fields, and tackling joggers to the ground.

I found that there the mission statements of most universities in the UK all set somewhat unrealistic tasks.

For example, one sets its sights on contributing to ‘society through the pursuit of education, learning and research.’ Another takes this one step further, attempting not only to contribute to society, but to transform it through ‘practice-based education, research and knowledge exchange.’

I was curious as to how various universities intended to transform society as whole, but this seems like a simple task in comparison to one university which seemingly intends to take conquer the world and become a ‘global university’.

While I consider the given examples to be reaching beyond their grip in terms of transforming society and moving towards the public good, at least I was able to understand what they were trying to say, which is more than I can say for the mission statements of some other universities.

For example, one claims to offer excellence in higher education ‘characterised by flexibility and interdisciplinarity.’  At first glance I worried that perhaps I did not understand this because I am not educated enough to understand the meaning of interdisciplinarity, however as I am typing this even Microsoft Word is identifying that there is a problem with this word by producing a squiggly red line beneath it.

The dictionary defines interdisciplinarity as the combining of two or more academic fields into one single discipline. This raises the question as to why on earth this particular univeristy did not simply explain this instead of using the complex word. I am reminded of an episode of ‘Friends’ in which the character of Joey Tribiani uses a thesaurus for every single word in an attempt to sound intelligent, and ends up changing his own name to Baby Kangaroo Tribbiani.

Presumably if you are reading a university prospectus it is because you are intending to go to university and so are fairly well educated, however this does mean that Universities should over complicate anything. So if you are someone who writes prospectuses – please refrain from employing sesquipedalian.

Seminar Notes - Frege

Frege is often referred to as the father of analytic philosophy; well known for his theories on the philosophy of language.

Frege believed that a sentence, or proposition, has two characteristics; sense and reference. The thought of a proposition is it's sense, and the subject of a sentence is it's reference.

Unlike Aristotle, Frege believed that the meaning of a sentence is not contained in the words or connected of the object; it is the sentence that gives the meaning not the individual words. For example, with the proposition 'the cat sat on the mat', the meaning is given through the combination an position of the words, not through the words themselves. Frege believed that words are purely nominal, it makes no difference what you call something, or if you use more than one name for the same thing.

According to Frege, a proposition can be one of three things. It can be true, false or meaningless. In order for a proposition to be true or false, it must have a point of reference. For example, the proposition 'The present King of France is bald' makes sense and we can understand it. However, as there is no King of France, there is no point of reference, and therefore it is not verifiable, and so is meaningless. A meaningless sentence can be useful, but is purely emotive.

Frege also introduced the idea of logical positivism - expressing a negative as a positive. For example, the proposition 'nobody is on the road' is not meaningful because 'nobody' is a logical object; nothing is something. Frege solved this problem by making the negative a positive:

For all possible roads, no object is on the road. This is true.

(Argument) (Function)

This solved the problem because the proposition has a sense and a reference point and so is verifiable. This methodology launched positivism.

In his book Language, Truth and Logic (1936) philosopher, A.J Ayer argues the idea of the verification principle in relation to logical positivism. The verification principle was an expansion on Frege's ideas of meaningless propositions. Ayer believed that the only sentences worth discussing are those which can be verified empirically, and that propositions that cannot be verified are merely expressions of emotions. For example, the statement 'God exists' is not verifiable, and so is meaningless. The verification principle was later expanded to claim that statements can be meaningful if they could be verified in theory or in actuality. However, a criticism of the verification principle is that the principle itself cannot be verified; and so in theory is itself meaningless.

Karl Popper introduced the Falsification Principle, claiming that propositions are meaningful if they can be falsified. It means that to assert something is to deny something else. For example, the statement 'all men are immortal' is falsifiable with the presentation of one dead man. However, the statement 'all men are mortal' is not falsifiable because just because to date all men have been mortal does not mean to say that there will not one day be a man who is immortal. Therefore, the statement that 'all men are mortal' is meaningless because it is not falsifiable. Anthony Flew used the falsification principle to draw the conclusion that all religious statements are meaningless.

Philosopher, Richard Swinburne, used an analogy of toys in a cupboard to challenge the falsification principle. He stated 'there are toys in my cupboard that come alive when no one is able to detect them.' Swinburne used this as a challenge claiming that even though it is not falsifiable but that the concept of the toy's coming alive had enough meaning for us to be able to understand it.

I think I agree with the idea that if something is not verifiable it is purely emotive, however I do not agree that it is therefore meaningless, or not worth discussing. I think that it is the emotive propositions that are the most interesting parts of conversations.

Anthony Kenny - Philosophy in the Modern World - Chapter 5 synopsis

The following is a synopsis of chapter 5 of Anthony Kenny's Philosophy in the Modern World' - 'Language'

Frege on Sense and Reference

• 1892 paper - Sense and Reference
• Is identity a relation?
• It cannot be a relation between objects that signs stand for.
• It cannot be a relation between signs because signs are arbitrary.
• Frege distinguished between two kinds of signification:

1. Reference of expression - the object it refers to
2. Sense of expression - the mode which a sign presents its object

• An identity statement is true and informative if the sign of identity is flanked by two names with the same reference but different senses.
• All sentences have signs, sense and reference.
• Using signs we express a sense and denote a reference.
• The sense of a word = what we grasp when we understand the word.
• Images are subjective and so are personal.
• The sense of a sign is common to all uses of the language - therefore senses are public and can be passed through generations.
• Frege says that sentences can lack reference, but this is because they contain names that lack a reference, eg Odysseus.
• If a name lacks a reference it does not affect the thought.
• We are driven to accept a sentence's truth value as the reference.
• The relation between a sentence and it's truth value is the same as that between a name and its reference.
• May philosopher accepted Frege's idea of a difference between predication and assertion, but rejected the notion that complete sentences have a reference of any kind.

The Pragmatists on Language and Truth

• Charles Sanders Peirce = similar to Frege.
• Both rejected the traditional way of distinguishing between subject and predicate.
• Propositions are either complete or incomplete (unsaturated) symbols.
• Proper names - Frege called them arguments. Peirce called them indices.
• Frege's concept of expressions and functions Peirce called icons.
• Peirce general theory of signs = Semiotics
• Peirce defined signs in three classes:

1. Natural signs. Eg, a cloud is a sign of rain
2. Iconic signs. Should share with its object some feature that each could have if the other did not exist. The method of interpreting this feature should be fixed by convention.
3. Symbols - determined by convention. most importantly, words.

• Since Peirce, theorists are divided semiotics into three disciplines:

1. Syntactics - the study of grammar.
2. Semantics - the study of the relationship between language and reality.
3. Pragmatics - the study of social context and the purposes and consequences of communication. Meaning and truth.

• Peirce and James explained meaning in similar ways.
• For James the truth of a belief depends on its consequences, or the consequences of believing it.
• Truth is not the same as reality.
• Truth is something known, thought or said about reality.

Russell's Theory of Descriptions

• Critic of James - attacked the pragmatists account of truth in an article in 1908 - Transatlantic Truth.
• For Russell, one proposition could be true and the other false.
• He was interested in different kinds of meaning that words and phrases might have and the way they might turn out to lack meaning.
• Any genuine proper name must stand for something, it must 'directly represent some object.'
• Frege and Russell aimed to construct a language that would be a more precise instrument than ordinary language.
• For Frege and Russell, it is essential that such a language should contain only expressions with a definite sense.

The Picture Theory of the Proposition

• Wittgenstein built on Russell's theory of descriptions to analyse the descriptions of complex objects.
• Sentences can be meaning but false.
• Wittgenstein believed language disguised the structure of thought beyond recognition.
• It is the job of philosophy to uncover thought through analysis.
• In his diary on 29/09/1914, Wittgenstein stated that propositions are essentially pictorial in nature.
• He defined picture not only as drawings and painting but as musical scores, maps, etc.
• Representation: What is it representative of? Whether it represents correctly or incorrectly.
• Pictorial form = possibility of structure.
• Pictures can be more of less abstract.
• Logical form = the minimum a picture must have to portray a situation.
• There is an important contrast between names and what they refer to.
• To understand a name is to grasp its reference.
• To understand a proposition is to grasp its sense.
• What Wittgenstein meant by calling a proposition a picture can be summed up in nine theses:

1. A proposition is essentially a composite.
2. Elements of a proposition are correlated by human decision with elements of reality.
3. The combination of these elements presents a possible state of affairs.
4. A proposition stands in an essential relation to the possibly situation it represents - shares a logical structure.
5. Relationships can only be shown because logical form can only be mirrored not represented.
6. Every proposition is bipolar - either true or false.
7. A proposition is either true or false by agreeing or disagreeing with reality.
8. A proposition must be independent of the actual situation.
9. No proposition is a priori true.

Language Games and Private Languages

• Wittgenstein thought that philosophy is an activity not a theory.
• Ordinary language is embedded in social structures and activities that Wittgenstein called language games.
• Understanding language is a state rather than a process.
• Mental mechanism doctrine - to understand the meaning of a word is to call upon an appropriate image in connection with it.
• To name something is not sufficient to confront it.
• 'Pain' is not a private language.
• There cannot be a language whose words refer to what can only be known to the individual speaker of that language - there can be no private language.
• This is completely contradictory to the following philosophers:

Descartes: Language has meaning while existance of ones own body remains uncertain.

Hume: It is possible for thoughts and experiences to be recognised and classified while the external world is in suspense.

Mill and Schopenhauer: Man can express the contents of his mind in language while questioning the existence of other minds.

All these theories require the possibilty of private language. 

WINOL Critical Reflection - 02/11/11

Overall I think that the bulletin this week was the best so far in terms of quality and professionalism. Here are my thoughts about it in detail...

Headlines: I thought that the headlines this week were excellent. There were good soundbites, and interesting, top quality video clips. The only criticism would be that it might be better if the strap lines were a bit bigger to make them clearer and easier for the viewer to read, although this is not a major problem because it is possible to read them at the the size they were.

Brine interview: I thought the interview with Steve Brine was excellent. It was really well framed, you could hear him clearly, and the background was relevant but did not take any attention away from Brine. In addition to this, he gave some good sound bites, and the whole interview stuck to the rule that comment should be in the interviewee's voice and facts should be in the interviewers voice. I don't have anything to criticise about it at all.

Farage interview: I thought that the interview with Farage was not as good as the Brine interview. Although you could hear what he was saying, the sound was not top quality, it was a bit fuzzy.He seemed to be in quite a dark area, although I understand that this was possibly unavoidable. I think it would have looked better if Farage had been decentred in the shot, and if it was just a bit tighter so we could see more of his face.

Occupy Bournemouth: This piece was good because Ali made sure that the facts were in his voice, and all the comment was given by the people he was interviewing. Initially the shots in the piece were good and relevant, such as the tents, and people painting signs, although the 99% sign was quite confusing. However there were quite a few shots of a sign with very small writing, which was impossible for the viewer to read. I might have been better if Ali had found a clearer sign to film. The interview in the tent was well framed, and it was good that the two people Ali interviewed were facing different ways. Overall I thought he got some good sound bites and relevant interviews. I also thought it was good that WINOL went back to Ali for an update, so that the viewer knew that they had the most up to date information on the situation.

Bin Collection: I thought that the shots at the start of this piece were really good, they were clear and completely relevant. Like Ali, Lee also made sure that the facts were in his voice, and the comments came from people he was interviewing. I thought it was an improvement on Lee's last piece because he took on board the comments and using complicated figures, and this time the figures he gave were simplified. He made sure that the piece was balanced, which was professional. I thought his sign off was, again, professional, but could have been better if the shot was a bit tighter because the background was distracting.

Sport: I thought the sport handover was good again this week. However, David said that Dael 'had the pleasure of being at the game.' This was purely comment and so was unnecessary. The sport, as usual, was of a very high standard and the commentary was professional. As Brian stated in the debrief 'less is more', and I would agree that the football piece in particular was much too long. I also agree with the comments from the first years, that there needs to be some mention of what story is coming up after the sport so that viewers who are not interested in sport do not lose interest. Perhaps there could be a "coming up next" rolling along the bottom of the screen while the sport is on.

Lasers: I really liked the start of Tom's piece about laser technology, the close up of the 'danger' sign then the zoom out to reveal the lab. I thought this was good because the danger sign would grab the attention of the viewer who would want to find out what the dangerous thing is. Tom did well to keep the facts in voice throughout the piece without adding comment. I think that Tom took on board comments about his pieces to camera needing to be shorter, which he did successfully this week. The interview with Rob Eason was relevant and you could hear him clearly, but I felt that he needed to be looking more face on at the camera.

WINOL Life: I like the addition of the clips from WINOL Life as the 'and finally' piece this week.

Critical Refection: Bins, Black Bags and Bitching

My column this week was about an experience of living of halls. I thought that this would be an appropriate experience to write about because the majority of people who read this blog and who would be reading Diary of a Winchester Lady are university students, and so would probably be able to relate to the story.

At first I was concerned that writing the piece would be disrespectful to the girl involved in the argument, however as my column is purely social commentary of my experiences, I decided that there was no reason not to include this experience. I also chose this topic because I thought that I would be able to make it humorous.

I chose the title Bins, Black Bags and Bitching because the repetition of the explosive consonant 'B' creates a harsh sound when being read, which prepares the reader for the conflict in the piece. I also wanted to use a list of three because it is a commonly used literary devise.

I started the piece described how I was 'waiting silently...ready to pounce.' I thought that this would work well because I tried to make it sound as if I was a predator stalking my prey, and that this would get the attention of the reader who would then want to know what/who I was waiting for.

I wanted my description of the girl to fit with the theme of predator/prey. To do this I used words such as 'elegant' and 'easily startled'. I described how she 'scrambled to find her keys.' The use of the word 'scrambled' has connotations of panic and added to the intensity of the situation. I did not immediately reveal to the reader what I had been waiting for her for because I wanted to keep their attention so that they would want to read on to find out what the problem was. The statement 'she knew exactly what I wanted' makes the reader question whether they, too, will actually learn what I wanted.

I decided to include a flashback in this piece as a stalling mechanism before revealing what the reader wants to know. The flashback I chose is one which was relevant to the piece because it was about being polite to people when you really want to be rude. I decided to use this because I thought it was something that the reader would be able to relate to.

When I came to actually explaining what the issue had been I decided that I did not want to go into too much detail because this would be boring to read, and would be somewhat of an anticlimax to the piece! I decided to mention my annoyance at the misuse of the apostrophe because I thought that it would be something that the reader would be bound to have an opinion on, whether it annoyed them too, or whether they are someone who is annoyed by the apostrophe rules.

Ultimately I was pleased with the piece and hope was pleased to write something more light hearted and humorous in contrast to the seriousness of my column last week.

Diary of a Winchester Lady: Bins, Black Bags and Bitching

Silently I waited with my back against the wall while intermittently leaning forward to look through the glass pane in the door then quickly leaning back against the wall so no one could see me. I was fully prepared to wait as long as necessary, with a go-ahead bar and a bottle of water in my handbag to keep me going, although I am certain my rage was more than enough sustenance. I was on the hunt, in a prime position to stalk my prey and ready to pounce as soon as I had her in my sights.

Then I spotted her, an elegant creature, one of those girls who looks like a top shop catalogue has thrown up on her.  Poor thing, so easily started when I flung the hall door open. She scrambled to find her keys, but it was too late, I knew she was there, she knew I had been waiting for her and she knew exactly what I wanted.

Even though we both knew we disliked each other and were about to have an argument, we acted terribly British and started a sequence of polite small talk. My mouth said “Hiya Natasha*, you alright?” but my eyes said “I am about to crush you with my verbal steam roller of rage.”

I have a bad habit of being polite to people that I actually have a valid reason to be rude to. I remember one weekend when I was backing home in Guernsey, and a women on a horse trotted out of a side road completely ignoring the yellow line. I very nearly crashed my little Hyundai into her horse and even I was surprised that I managed to stop in time on the wet road. I was absolutely furious, especially when the woman looked at me and mouthed “Sorry” while smiling. In my mind I said “Sorry? You’re sorry? So you bloody should be you nearly just killed us both you absolute idiot” but what actually came out was “No worries” as I smiled at her and calmly drove away.

Well this was not going one of those moments; Natasha was going to get a double dose of *** You may be wondering what she actually did to make me so mad, well there were a mixture of ingredients which formed my rage cake. The first was that she had put a note under my door stating that everyone had given her £2 (a total of £22) to get toilet paper and bin bags (which are provided free by the university), she had made a bin rota even though she knew most of us had agreed to only use the bins in our rooms and take responsibility for them ourselves, and finally, and perhaps most annoying she had print off signs for the bathroom which included:

“Throw the toilet rolls away when they are finished. The bin is right NEXT to you”

“Flush the toilet. Girl’s lets not give the boys nightmares”

I think the fact that she had missed the apostrophe in ‘let’s’ was what finally pushed me over the edge.

When I confronted her about the fact she had taken money for items that we are given for free, and that she is the only one that uses the bin, she seemed quite taken aback, as if she could not understand what my problem actually was. After my rant she backed down and claimed it had all been a misunderstanding. This was not particularly satisfactory so before leaving I calmly said “ok this was a misunderstanding – kind of like your grasp of basic grammar. Sort your apostrophe out.”

Had I had more time to think of parting words I am certain I would not have made myself sound like such a nerd; oh well, live a learn.

*Name changed