Theme 1 - comments collection

1
http://theoandmeth.blogspot.se/2015/09/reflection-of-theme-1.html?showComment=1442270830883#c3199125121651850432

2
http://dm2572elvira.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-theory-of-knowledge-and-theory_14.html?showComment=1442272698577#c3191776890041345765

3
http://paullinderoth.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-theory-of-knowledge-and-theory_14.html?showComment=1442327675217

4
http://elindm2572.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-reflection.html?showComment=1442329021480

5
http://butlikewhyisit.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-reflection.html?showComment=1442433776141#c5881693048895748760

6
http://ninopmedia.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-reflections-after-thelecture.html?showComment=1442440610499

7
http://theoryandmethodmediatechnology.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-theory-of-knowledge-and-theory_9.html?showComment=1442734785343#c2199781469391413632

8
http://tamfmtol.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-post-theory-of-knowledge-and.html?showComment=1442735726825#c9197172199610703688

9
http://dm2572byen.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-theory-of-knowledge-and-theory_13.html?showComment=1442738805028

10
http://blog4course99.blogspot.se/2015/09/reflection-of-theme-1.html?showComment=1442749193117

Reflections of theme 2

To be honest,in the start,I thought the theme which addressed the enlightenment and dialectic was very abstract for me.Then I tried to understand these two conceptions in the historical context.Meanwhile,there are eight questions to help me understand clearly.

In the seminar,we definitely came to the terms of the interpretation of substructures and superstructures in group discussion.To some extents,the substructures constitute and change the superstructures.I just red an article called “China’s Weibo:Is faster different?“ in theme 3. 

On the presupposition of the discussion, I probably could treat the governmental means of intervening and mobilizing public opinion with the microblog as the conduction of substructures,ultimately,to access the intention to control and influence the superstructures,like propagating policies and enhancing state’s regime. 

In this question,we also had the different opinions on our on .We argued with the nature of mass medias and popular cultures.Firstly I preferred the mass medias as the substructure because I thought many of them were just the product with short duration to cater to the public.Meanwhile,someone said that we actually participated in the developments with various medias.Then,the professor argued that mass medias may be a way of enlightening public.The mass media teach us what kind of life we should be have and how we should think.

There is another topic which impressed me on that the perception can be  naturally and historically determined.We tried to understand on the history of fine arts to convince ourselves.Nowadays,people even could identify the painting with the some features that match with different periods.For the fashion industry,although the retro style is popular,it might be slight different with the real ancient stuff.Because of the historical and even geographical barriers,our perception is shaped by the certain context,such as the change of our aesthetics.In the notion of "aura",I still used the art objects to figure it out.

It should be the "soul" of the art that cannot never reproduced and just works to facilitate the "conversation" between the objects and the individuals.

  

Theme 3: Research and theory(before lecture)

   I red an article from “new media & society 2014, Vol. 16(1) 24 –37 ”,named “China’s Weibo:Is faster different?” It reveals the development and utilization of china’s social medias and how the governmental interventions can be success in the information control.As the development of IT techniques,Chinese social networks facilitates individual initiatives of netizens on their discontent for the negative consequences by the social controversies.Thus,the government has paid the attention to implement multifarious efforts in the chinese internet ecology for directing and mobilizing public opinion.The main content mirrors the contradiction and adaption between the ecology of chinese social networks and the state’s regime.

The paper I choose is “Malin, J. B. (2011) A very popular blog: The internet and the possibilities of publicity” that reveal the two mode of publicity of openness and promotion in online communications an traditional broadcast medias.It discusses the importance about digital democracy,meanwhile argues that we must be aware of the relative lack of promotional publicity in online.

Briefly explain to a first year university student what theory is, and what theory is not.

 According to the “The Nature of Theory in Information Systems”,the theory bases on the necessary components of means of representation,construct,relationships between constructs and the specification of the scope of the theory.I may say it is kind of synthesis of different objects which are interpreted from every aspects with structural and dialectic ways.

Describe the major theory or theories that are used in your selected paper. Which theory type (see Table 2 in Gregor) can the theory or theories be characterized as?

The theory of the paper mostly conduct in the conceptual way which is demonstrated by some current phenomenons and statistics.It addresses the critique examinations to concentrate on the economic implications by the inequalities between the different possibilities of publicity,hence,concludes the importance of digital democracy.I think it is almost belong to the I(analysis) & IV(Explanation and Prediction). The author attempts to combine some related statistics to explain in two modes of publicity,meanwhile,there is also an assumption in the end when the author argues the relevance and insufficiency of arguments about the ”digital divide”and “net neutrality”.

Which are the benefits and limitations of using the selected theory or theories?

I think using statistics and analysis with data in this paper is the authentic access to conduct the critique theory. Especially,when these statistics are in terms of social opinions or individual consensuses the theory will be much more convinced,like some renowned media productions and websites quoted. And the prediction of the argument could be another leverage to conduct and enhance the theoretical framing. On the other side,as we discussed before in theme 1,probably, we should understand the certain phenomenons from multifarious sides.Theory research should base on the various considerations.

Theme 1:Learning summary

    From the “Critique of Pure Reason” of Kent and Socrates’ argument that “knowledge is perception”,I probed something to do with the nature of knowledge and how the the apriori form is determined authentic so that I could have the deeper understanding about the science research and related methods for academic uses.

   
    I referred to some historical and theoretical materials for a good understanding of kent’s theory,hence,I checked the transcendental idealism and tried to know what kind of situation could be interpret a prior.Furthermore,I continued to learning about the “Empiricism” and “Rationalism” to clear the western philosophical system from the superficial and systematic ways.

    In the lecture and seminar,we assumed a infant in a specific living environment who never accepted the edification with intelligence of humans.Then we discussed what kind of creature he would be. The preliminary conclusion is that he might be have the cognition with his own way to live as unique form with others. Because we all have our own “world” ,maybe it is incomprehensible to consider the world from the outside of us.Kent argues that “perception without conception is blind”.For the baby we assumed before,probably,he do not have any conceptions,but I don’t think he is blind.Because  these conceptions we represent here are in our world.

    There is a question I mentioned in the end of the prior blog.I think after the weekly study,it inspires me about the clue to figure them out in some degree.The first is that “are the objects and I the mirrors of the world in deed ?” Professor said”our world is always our world”.The world might just exist in our mind because of our limited cognition or access to perceive the world.To say simply,we could only find the specific area of the world in our ways though the kind of reflection like the mirror to face up the outside changes.In some degree, We are creating things for our worlds as we need because we see the shape of it meantime give these things meaning to constitute the community which make our life easier and advanced on the presupposition of our certain cognition. 

    There is a sample discussion I red before that assumes some fishes in a round fishbowl They will see the curvilinear motion which is just kind of linear motion we can see without any external forces.However,which view about the phenomenon is more authentic?If these fishes were talented enough as humans.Probably they could conclude something concerned with their own experiences even sciences which are obviously absurd to us.Nevertheless,who knows that there is another immense and invisible fishbowl around us or not.

Theme 2: Critical media studies (Prior lecture)

What is "Enlightenment"?

As the author mentioned” enlightenment’s program was disenchantment of the world”,people may need be aware of the nature of the mass cultures,which is kind of products from the industrial cultures.It wants to notice people that we are in the myths that we created for many years,and that is “devil” lack of emotional depth while we are enjoying to consume it like we don’t know it.

What is "Dialectic"?

The logic of enlightenment .The creator and spirit of order should have the same significance of ruling the nature.

What is "Nominalism" and why is it an important concept in the text?

It stands for the kind of symbol which do not truly exist to make the kind of dialectic or science research more easy.

What is the meaning and function of "myth" in Adorno and Horkheimer's argument?

People believe that human beings can change and shape the world through the intellectual development.Finally,We get involved and addicted in the tricky circle, in which we have the definite belief so called the another “myth”.

In the beginning of the essay, Benjamin talks about the relation between "superstructure" and "substructure" in the capitalist order of production. What do the concepts "superstructure" and "substructure" mean in this context and what is the point of analyzing cultural production from a Marxist perspective?

The two terms should be all from Marxist perspective that reveal the relations to establish the stable structure.The substructure connects the individuals to build up the complex,or reveals the processing of production.It is based on the certain objects.And the superstructure lead to the crucial conceptions to shape the kind of fluctuation of development.For cultural production,it should be the conflict of the “substructure” way to ruling the “superstructure”.The point is at the balance of spirit and order.  

Does culture have revolutionary potentials (according to Benjamin)? If so, describe these potentials. Does Benjamin's perspective differ from the perspective of Adorno & Horkheimer in this regard?

Benjamin said that we might be shameless if we sill insist in the knowledge poverty.I think it demonstrates the arguments from him that culture is always in the progress. There are two different ways between Ben and Ado&Hor.Ben argues that aesthetics use the politics.However,Ado&Hor just treat it as the entertainment or cultural consumption.From these two views. I prefer the one of Benjamin,which approve the way to separate the potentials in different aspects.

Benjamin discusses how people perceive the world through the senses and argues that this perception can be both naturally and historically determined. What does this mean? Give some examples of historically determined perception (from Benjamin's essay and/or other contexts).

It says our perception is not only dependent on the natural features,like we see the world.It is not like what we truly see.There is another element of history considerations to shape the certain factors.We have a certain background to perceive the wolrd and create the arts in which we could find out some historical evidences.There are some examples from late roman times mentioned by Benjamin. 

What does Benjamin mean by the term "aura"? Are there different kinds of aura in natural objects compared to art objects?

It should be the “soul” of objects.It one piece of art is referred or copied ,we could say it have not the so-called “aura” any more.It should be connected with such terms like “uniqueness” “dependability”.We could perceive every objects from their “aura”.It probably is in sense of identities.For art objects, We might request it like the crucial reason why it can be treated as the true arts.

Theme 1: Theory of knowledge and theory of science (Prior lecture)

          Considering the origin of the universal,everything just exists on its own.There is no specific so-called rules or principles to affect itself to exist as what it truly should be like.The cognition is a complex.We could not never forget that the human beings should be the element to constitute and exist. The cognition from us is limitative and relative,facing up other objects. However,for survival and development,we explore the world,observe the objects to gain the knowledge,which is kind of existence to conform to our mind and in a sense of making our life easy.Kant claims that a priori and the acquired experience are the main factors to build up the knowledge.As a science research,we try to find the nature of objects with some rules of thumb.This kind of experience generally is from external changes.But it’s almost tricky to determine the conceptions. There is a Chinese philosophical term called “dao”,which can be seeming synthesis of all objects,and potential relations that should be exist. It argues that cognizing the world should be through improving the potential of organs,in another words called intrinsic raise.I think It might be similar with the apriori form which Kant suggested.

          As a individual in the world,we are so tiny that we even can not see or hear the whole features of the world just “with” our eyes and ears.Like Socrates argues that “through” is in the degree of processing and interpretation.It will be generate some information of reflection through our organs.These organs should be run as an unit to complete the series of stimuli,Oppositely,everything comes to nothing if we let every organ work independently.It should be superficial conception to understand what we “use” to connect the external changes.Our body whole like a synthesis to perceive and react this kind of changes.Actually,the empiricism claims that the observation causes knowledge.People’s perceptions can uncover and reveal the truth. This kind of perceptions are caused by the elements outside which do exist.Socrates agrees that people should find the truth from the soul world.I think the nature of soul world is in degree of perceptions.From this view,I could say that the argument might be towards "empiricism". These two texts inspire me to think about the conception of objects and myself,such as,whether I’m in the “mirroring” of the world or “are the objects and I the mirrors of the world in deed ? ” Do I know the specific “mirror” --- myself ,if it is?