Johan Asplund and David Lyon
I think the book was good on the whole, I feel good about what Johan Asplund writes, he writes in an intellectual way. Of disinterest, I think that the last chapter was a little tough to get through, it would have been enough with a description of Christopher Polhem known works, perhaps above all timekeeping movement, and not all of the copper mine mm. This causes kompeplikationer and I love to solve.
How does the thunder? This is described in Johan Asplunds book. He describes it by the sound recorder and with words like crash, boom and bang. Asplund discusses scientific thinking on the question "How does the thunder?" He thinks about three different answers:
1 - ashes sounds like thunder. It will be a totologi.
2 - ashes sounds like that! It plays a band and recorded sounds of thunder. It gives nothing of the thunder of those who already know word. It gives the sound as it is. It is objectivity that does not give knowledge.
3 - ashes sounds crash, bang, boom. This option gives something about the thunder. It represents the thunder. Scientific knowledge is largely a representation.
He also shows how to achieve these sound effects in a theater, to illustrate them with the illusion. For me, delusion to fool the senses into thinking that it is reality. To achieve this illusion can roll stones in a trälåda with a prior housing of the plate, then a similar sound of thunder. A simpler alternative to bend a plåtbit with wooden handle and then when sheet metal piece goes back to its original form, the sound of thunder. These solutions have certainly been experiments until its contemporary state of "Drottningholm Theater." Which source device produces the most ASHEN sound? This question is felställd. Both devices produced åskljud in slightly different ways. There is no right or wrong answer (Asplund page 42).
He argues that the social sciences is to understand and to science's job is to explain the problem (Asplund, 2003). In my view, it is both vice-versa. Johan use of the term intelligibilitet and curiosité. These two concepts do not distinguish between explaining and understanding. They are more a concept of curiosity and / or inquisitivness. This makes it a little difficult to understand. An understanding leads us to feel compassion for the person in question and that you then have the opportunity to identify themselves to the other person. This can then lead to the possibility of an intellectual momentum which then becomes an important reason to ask new questions and formulate new answers. This curiosity is an important ingredient to push society forward, there is no curiosity of mankind, so society should stop and not move forward. A small child learns to walk is involved in a process of "instinctive" troubleshooting and as "instinctive" rectification of the resulting errors. This process without so the child would never learn to walk. The same process repeats itself when the child has been a few years older and must learn to cycle. This tested the child's balance. Curious people are doing research and science possible. I would not, of course, argue that a child learns to walk or cycle to be considered as a scientist or researcher. What I want to say is that there is a continuum that extends from child to learn to walk or cycle to the programmer who became Nobel laureates in physics or another and is impossible or unnecessary to point to any particular point in this continuum and say exactly this adopt process engineering or closure of the "scientific" nature.
A concept I settled on in this book was "Simulacrum", I will sort out the concept of significance. Simulacrum must be such that it creates an experience of the striking similarity and at the same time an experience of the discrepancy between illusion and reality. I was yesterday in fifty årsfest, when it was announced that a surprise was on its way after dinner. It came in a man who resembled a priest, should we ask now, I thought. After a moment he took out a bag with rope and a deck of cards, etc.. Then, it was up to me he will conjure for us, I thought no more about it. Suddenly, it was up to me. This is a simulacrum, we see what he does, but still can not understand it. The whole thing is an illusion to the eye, but nonetheless real. His art is to trick our minds to see what he wants us to see and hide their dexterity. It all seems to be an illusion to the eye. Is the answer dexterity that makes it all seems an illusion / art. For me, the answer is YES, whether the painting, magic or mm film. Is a photograph a simulacrum? No, it is not because it tells the truth according to what happens in reality but an illusion. Actually, it is odd to say that a photograph is similar to the avfotograferade motive. The concept of equality requires quietly concept of difference, therefore, duality, according to Lévinas. It is an image and image. Art can be truthful but not, it is an illusion created by this uncertainty to know or not know. It goes without saying that the absence of any discrepancy does nothing new or unexpected has been said. Inventing simulacrum is a very special way to seek knowledge. The products of this knowledge quest are "similarities", similarities involving differences. Simulacrum is like dreaming. Asplund writes the following: the requirement that a simulacrum is not to coincide with what is IMITATE or ILLUSION seems to me far met the "Night Ride". Synesthesia is a person who can make the link visual hearing, but not auditory perception, and vice versa. A synestetisk experience is conscious. Synestetikern have - acute and accidental - experience of a certain color when a certain figure is displayed while a person who has learned to respond with a certain color indication when a certain figure shows have no such experience. Synesthesia is permanent. A synestetiker linking not on one occasion a certain figure with a certain color, and on another occasion the same figure with a different color. The perception is always the same and changed not long time, it is like in old age as it was in childhood. Addicts can get temporary Synesthesia in the use of mescaline and LSD. Humans can also suffer from this condition at the famine at SUNBURN or so. Synestetikern is not mentally ill and can function quite normally in everyday life. Polhem I will not say so much, he was a practitioner who was employed by the king during his time. He was not good at making plans, but he was himself trained, one can say. He was technically smart and dexterous, responsive and so on. On his trips abroad he received additional ideas on various projects such as how to transport materials from the mine mm.
Question 1: Is it possible to manipulate a sense of fully or all of your senses? Is it really, it is not often on the ignorance of the subject. To see things that do not conform with reality.
This book of Lyon describes in a good way developments in a concise format. The book is somewhat confusing Middle otherwise interesting? It captures many well-known sociologists, philosophers, politicians and psychologists.
Post modernity is a concept in today's Western world is described as a globalized world. Post modernity is an idea, cultural, social, and / or perhaps a combination of all three? Lyons writes that he adopts pre, modern and postmodern in a complex interaction. The post is the successor of the modern. It is modern capitalism. It is probably the traditional society in the feudal. Modern society is different from the pre with the pencil's economy, objective relationships between people, big city life, industrialization, individualization, rational thinking. A highly significant number of Western ideas, starting with "Providence", which turned into "progress" and then transferred to the "nihilism". Providence seeks to God's care for the world after its creation, how God oversees historical progress as it moves toward a specific goal. It may be worth serious analytical distinction between post-modernism, with a focus on the cultural, and post modernity, where the social is at the center. The first suggestion that a new kind of society "was taking shape came from Daniel Bell. The new industrial society had taken off in the late 1960s and was based mainly on theoretical knowledge, was formerly the hands especially when working with. The past industrialization would turn into an information society, and this by including new information technologies and communications technologies. The intellectual power would do whatever muscle power had done during the revolution. Bell believes that the post INDUSTRIALISM in fact contributed to the emergence of post modernity. Nihilism is not halted by the delight of services, computers and television, rather, he exploited the possibilities with this. But there were cultural contradictions within capitalism. He stressed that the rationality would be good, and thus could get a new HEDONISM to flourish. The implications of the new technologies will be available in a consumer society. It is inevitable. It must not be forgotten that there will be a higher competition from the rest of Europe. This makes it more costly for the owners and cheaper for consumers. This is, of course, the goal of the goods will even reduce expenditure. Despite this, we should not forget that the disparities are growing in the world, and people who have really much money earn more and yet we have some of the world who can not even write or read. Because they do not have to attend a school. Lyon takes up the positive changes in the form of strike, but is this money hysteria sound? I myself do not believe it, I think Lévinas wrote that some people are constantly hungry because they are never satisfied but are always striving to get more and more, then will it never satisfied during his lifetime. How many have their dream house and the Dream Car, yes it is he who drives around in a cheap car and still feel satisfaction with it. Konsumismen knows no borders. Shopping is no longer a need in some parts of the world, but pure pleasure in some neighborhoods. Bell distinguishes between economics, politics and culture and see science as driving forces for social change, in contrast to the contemporary "culture" narcismens ", discusses Lyotard science itself as a" form of discourse. " Bell sees science as an aspect of the new "axialprincipen", which is more a pure discourse, it is objective, which in Robert Merton classic illustration. Lyotard puts science in connection with the culture and notes that the commercialization of research results that we get an increase in power, but the bargain we miss the truth. There are no guarantees that the reason may release consequences, unfortunately. The social issue is hardly fair, but instead how much injustice there is, and what can we do about it?
Our postmodern condition is completely linked to the consumption of capitalism, our entire society goes back in time, with large classes and a teacher, as a mass. Brand Clothing is our stamp of status, leisure centers will be shut down, and so on. What is it from this? Chaos.
Question 2: What comes after post modernity? Have we any idea or is it a zero world we live in that Asplund would put it.
I think the book was good on the whole, I feel good about what Johan Asplund writes, he writes in an intellectual way. Of disinterest, I think that the last chapter was a little tough to get through, it would have been enough with a description of Christopher Polhem known works, perhaps above all timekeeping movement, and not all of the copper mine mm. This causes kompeplikationer and I love to solve.
How does the thunder? This is described in Johan Asplunds book. He describes it by the sound recorder and with words like crash, boom and bang. Asplund discusses scientific thinking on the question "How does the thunder?" He thinks about three different answers:
1 - ashes sounds like thunder. It will be a totologi.
2 - ashes sounds like that! It plays a band and recorded sounds of thunder. It gives nothing of the thunder of those who already know word. It gives the sound as it is. It is objectivity that does not give knowledge.
3 - ashes sounds crash, bang, boom. This option gives something about the thunder. It represents the thunder. Scientific knowledge is largely a representation.
He also shows how to achieve these sound effects in a theater, to illustrate them with the illusion. For me, delusion to fool the senses into thinking that it is reality. To achieve this illusion can roll stones in a trälåda with a prior housing of the plate, then a similar sound of thunder. A simpler alternative to bend a plåtbit with wooden handle and then when sheet metal piece goes back to its original form, the sound of thunder. These solutions have certainly been experiments until its contemporary state of "Drottningholm Theater." Which source device produces the most ASHEN sound? This question is felställd. Both devices produced åskljud in slightly different ways. There is no right or wrong answer (Asplund page 42).
He argues that the social sciences is to understand and to science's job is to explain the problem (Asplund, 2003). In my view, it is both vice-versa. Johan use of the term intelligibilitet and curiosité. These two concepts do not distinguish between explaining and understanding. They are more a concept of curiosity and / or inquisitivness. This makes it a little difficult to understand. An understanding leads us to feel compassion for the person in question and that you then have the opportunity to identify themselves to the other person. This can then lead to the possibility of an intellectual momentum which then becomes an important reason to ask new questions and formulate new answers. This curiosity is an important ingredient to push society forward, there is no curiosity of mankind, so society should stop and not move forward. A small child learns to walk is involved in a process of "instinctive" troubleshooting and as "instinctive" rectification of the resulting errors. This process without so the child would never learn to walk. The same process repeats itself when the child has been a few years older and must learn to cycle. This tested the child's balance. Curious people are doing research and science possible. I would not, of course, argue that a child learns to walk or cycle to be considered as a scientist or researcher. What I want to say is that there is a continuum that extends from child to learn to walk or cycle to the programmer who became Nobel laureates in physics or another and is impossible or unnecessary to point to any particular point in this continuum and say exactly this adopt process engineering or closure of the "scientific" nature.
A concept I settled on in this book was "Simulacrum", I will sort out the concept of significance. Simulacrum must be such that it creates an experience of the striking similarity and at the same time an experience of the discrepancy between illusion and reality. I was yesterday in fifty årsfest, when it was announced that a surprise was on its way after dinner. It came in a man who resembled a priest, should we ask now, I thought. After a moment he took out a bag with rope and a deck of cards, etc.. Then, it was up to me he will conjure for us, I thought no more about it. Suddenly, it was up to me. This is a simulacrum, we see what he does, but still can not understand it. The whole thing is an illusion to the eye, but nonetheless real. His art is to trick our minds to see what he wants us to see and hide their dexterity. It all seems to be an illusion to the eye. Is the answer dexterity that makes it all seems an illusion / art. For me, the answer is YES, whether the painting, magic or mm film. Is a photograph a simulacrum? No, it is not because it tells the truth according to what happens in reality but an illusion. Actually, it is odd to say that a photograph is similar to the avfotograferade motive. The concept of equality requires quietly concept of difference, therefore, duality, according to Lévinas. It is an image and image. Art can be truthful but not, it is an illusion created by this uncertainty to know or not know. It goes without saying that the absence of any discrepancy does nothing new or unexpected has been said. Inventing simulacrum is a very special way to seek knowledge. The products of this knowledge quest are "similarities", similarities involving differences. Simulacrum is like dreaming. Asplund writes the following: the requirement that a simulacrum is not to coincide with what is IMITATE or ILLUSION seems to me far met the "Night Ride". Synesthesia is a person who can make the link visual hearing, but not auditory perception, and vice versa. A synestetisk experience is conscious. Synestetikern have - acute and accidental - experience of a certain color when a certain figure is displayed while a person who has learned to respond with a certain color indication when a certain figure shows have no such experience. Synesthesia is permanent. A synestetiker linking not on one occasion a certain figure with a certain color, and on another occasion the same figure with a different color. The perception is always the same and changed not long time, it is like in old age as it was in childhood. Addicts can get temporary Synesthesia in the use of mescaline and LSD. Humans can also suffer from this condition at the famine at SUNBURN or so. Synestetikern is not mentally ill and can function quite normally in everyday life. Polhem I will not say so much, he was a practitioner who was employed by the king during his time. He was not good at making plans, but he was himself trained, one can say. He was technically smart and dexterous, responsive and so on. On his trips abroad he received additional ideas on various projects such as how to transport materials from the mine mm.
Question 1: Is it possible to manipulate a sense of fully or all of your senses? Is it really, it is not often on the ignorance of the subject. To see things that do not conform with reality.
This book of Lyon describes in a good way developments in a concise format. The book is somewhat confusing Middle otherwise interesting? It captures many well-known sociologists, philosophers, politicians and psychologists.
Post modernity is a concept in today's Western world is described as a globalized world. Post modernity is an idea, cultural, social, and / or perhaps a combination of all three? Lyons writes that he adopts pre, modern and postmodern in a complex interaction. The post is the successor of the modern. It is modern capitalism. It is probably the traditional society in the feudal. Modern society is different from the pre with the pencil's economy, objective relationships between people, big city life, industrialization, individualization, rational thinking. A highly significant number of Western ideas, starting with "Providence", which turned into "progress" and then transferred to the "nihilism". Providence seeks to God's care for the world after its creation, how God oversees historical progress as it moves toward a specific goal. It may be worth serious analytical distinction between post-modernism, with a focus on the cultural, and post modernity, where the social is at the center. The first suggestion that a new kind of society "was taking shape came from Daniel Bell. The new industrial society had taken off in the late 1960s and was based mainly on theoretical knowledge, was formerly the hands especially when working with. The past industrialization would turn into an information society, and this by including new information technologies and communications technologies. The intellectual power would do whatever muscle power had done during the revolution. Bell believes that the post INDUSTRIALISM in fact contributed to the emergence of post modernity. Nihilism is not halted by the delight of services, computers and television, rather, he exploited the possibilities with this. But there were cultural contradictions within capitalism. He stressed that the rationality would be good, and thus could get a new HEDONISM to flourish. The implications of the new technologies will be available in a consumer society. It is inevitable. It must not be forgotten that there will be a higher competition from the rest of Europe. This makes it more costly for the owners and cheaper for consumers. This is, of course, the goal of the goods will even reduce expenditure. Despite this, we should not forget that the disparities are growing in the world, and people who have really much money earn more and yet we have some of the world who can not even write or read. Because they do not have to attend a school. Lyon takes up the positive changes in the form of strike, but is this money hysteria sound? I myself do not believe it, I think Lévinas wrote that some people are constantly hungry because they are never satisfied but are always striving to get more and more, then will it never satisfied during his lifetime. How many have their dream house and the Dream Car, yes it is he who drives around in a cheap car and still feel satisfaction with it. Konsumismen knows no borders. Shopping is no longer a need in some parts of the world, but pure pleasure in some neighborhoods. Bell distinguishes between economics, politics and culture and see science as driving forces for social change, in contrast to the contemporary "culture" narcismens ", discusses Lyotard science itself as a" form of discourse. " Bell sees science as an aspect of the new "axialprincipen", which is more a pure discourse, it is objective, which in Robert Merton classic illustration. Lyotard puts science in connection with the culture and notes that the commercialization of research results that we get an increase in power, but the bargain we miss the truth. There are no guarantees that the reason may release consequences, unfortunately. The social issue is hardly fair, but instead how much injustice there is, and what can we do about it?
Our postmodern condition is completely linked to the consumption of capitalism, our entire society goes back in time, with large classes and a teacher, as a mass. Brand Clothing is our stamp of status, leisure centers will be shut down, and so on. What is it from this? Chaos.
Question 2: What comes after post modernity? Have we any idea or is it a zero world we live in that Asplund would put it.
How does the thunder? This is described in Johan Asplunds book. He describes it by the sound recorder and with words like crash, boom and bang. Asplund discusses scientific thinking on the question "How does the thunder?" He thinks about three different answers:
1 - ashes sounds like thunder. It will be a totologi.
2 - ashes sounds like that! It plays a band and recorded sounds of thunder. It gives nothing of the thunder of those who already know word. It gives the sound as it is. It is objectivity that does not give knowledge.
3 - ashes sounds crash, bang, boom. This option gives something about the thunder. It represents the thunder. Scientific knowledge is largely a representation.
He also shows how to achieve these sound effects in a theater, to illustrate them with the illusion. For me, delusion to fool the senses into thinking that it is reality. To achieve this illusion can roll stones in a trälåda with a prior housing of the plate, then a similar sound of thunder. A simpler alternative to bend a plåtbit with wooden handle and then when sheet metal piece goes back to its original form, the sound of thunder. These solutions have certainly been experiments until its contemporary state of "Drottningholm Theater." Which source device produces the most ASHEN sound? This question is felställd. Both devices produced åskljud in slightly different ways. There is no right or wrong answer (Asplund page 42).
He argues that the social sciences is to understand and to science's job is to explain the problem (Asplund, 2003). In my view, it is both vice-versa. Johan use of the term intelligibilitet and curiosité. These two concepts do not distinguish between explaining and understanding. They are more a concept of curiosity and / or inquisitivness. This makes it a little difficult to understand. An understanding leads us to feel compassion for the person in question and that you then have the opportunity to identify themselves to the other person. This can then lead to the possibility of an intellectual momentum which then becomes an important reason to ask new questions and formulate new answers. This curiosity is an important ingredient to push society forward, there is no curiosity of mankind, so society should stop and not move forward. A small child learns to walk is involved in a process of "instinctive" troubleshooting and as "instinctive" rectification of the resulting errors. This process without so the child would never learn to walk. The same process repeats itself when the child has been a few years older and must learn to cycle. This tested the child's balance. Curious people are doing research and science possible. I would not, of course, argue that a child learns to walk or cycle to be considered as a scientist or researcher. What I want to say is that there is a continuum that extends from child to learn to walk or cycle to the programmer who became Nobel laureates in physics or another and is impossible or unnecessary to point to any particular point in this continuum and say exactly this adopt process engineering or closure of the "scientific" nature.
A concept I settled on in this book was "Simulacrum", I will sort out the concept of significance. Simulacrum must be such that it creates an experience of the striking similarity and at the same time an experience of the discrepancy between illusion and reality. I was yesterday in fifty årsfest, when it was announced that a surprise was on its way after dinner. It came in a man who resembled a priest, should we ask now, I thought. After a moment he took out a bag with rope and a deck of cards, etc.. Then, it was up to me he will conjure for us, I thought no more about it. Suddenly, it was up to me. This is a simulacrum, we see what he does, but still can not understand it. The whole thing is an illusion to the eye, but nonetheless real. His art is to trick our minds to see what he wants us to see and hide their dexterity. It all seems to be an illusion to the eye. Is the answer dexterity that makes it all seems an illusion / art. For me, the answer is YES, whether the painting, magic or mm film. Is a photograph a simulacrum? No, it is not because it tells the truth according to what happens in reality but an illusion. Actually, it is odd to say that a photograph is similar to the avfotograferade motive. The concept of equality requires quietly concept of difference, therefore, duality, according to Lévinas. It is an image and image. Art can be truthful but not, it is an illusion created by this uncertainty to know or not know. It goes without saying that the absence of any discrepancy does nothing new or unexpected has been said. Inventing simulacrum is a very special way to seek knowledge. The products of this knowledge quest are "similarities", similarities involving differences. Simulacrum is like dreaming. Asplund writes the following: the requirement that a simulacrum is not to coincide with what is IMITATE or ILLUSION seems to me far met the "Night Ride". Synesthesia is a person who can make the link visual hearing, but not auditory perception, and vice versa. A synestetisk experience is conscious. Synestetikern have - acute and accidental - experience of a certain color when a certain figure is displayed while a person who has learned to respond with a certain color indication when a certain figure shows have no such experience. Synesthesia is permanent. A synestetiker linking not on one occasion a certain figure with a certain color, and on another occasion the same figure with a different color. The perception is always the same and changed not long time, it is like in old age as it was in childhood. Addicts can get temporary Synesthesia in the use of mescaline and LSD. Humans can also suffer from this condition at the famine at SUNBURN or so. Synestetikern is not mentally ill and can function quite normally in everyday life. Polhem I will not say so much, he was a practitioner who was employed by the king during his time. He was not good at making plans, but he was himself trained, one can say. He was technically smart and dexterous, responsive and so on. On his trips abroad he received additional ideas on various projects such as how to transport materials from the mine mm.
Question 1: Is it possible to manipulate a sense of fully or all of your senses? Is it really, it is not often on the ignorance of the subject. To see things that do not conform with reality.
This book of Lyon describes in a good way developments in a concise format. The book is somewhat confusing Middle otherwise interesting? It captures many well-known sociologists, philosophers, politicians and psychologists.
Post modernity is a concept in today's Western world is described as a globalized world. Post modernity is an idea, cultural, social, and / or perhaps a combination of all three? Lyons writes that he adopts pre, modern and postmodern in a complex interaction. The post is the successor of the modern. It is modern capitalism. It is probably the traditional society in the feudal. Modern society is different from the pre with the pencil's economy, objective relationships between people, big city life, industrialization, individualization, rational thinking. A highly significant number of Western ideas, starting with "Providence", which turned into "progress" and then transferred to the "nihilism". Providence seeks to God's care for the world after its creation, how God oversees historical progress as it moves toward a specific goal. It may be worth serious analytical distinction between post-modernism, with a focus on the cultural, and post modernity, where the social is at the center. The first suggestion that a new kind of society "was taking shape came from Daniel Bell. The new industrial society had taken off in the late 1960s and was based mainly on theoretical knowledge, was formerly the hands especially when working with. The past industrialization would turn into an information society, and this by including new information technologies and communications technologies. The intellectual power would do whatever muscle power had done during the revolution. Bell believes that the post INDUSTRIALISM in fact contributed to the emergence of post modernity. Nihilism is not halted by the delight of services, computers and television, rather, he exploited the possibilities with this. But there were cultural contradictions within capitalism. He stressed that the rationality would be good, and thus could get a new HEDONISM to flourish. The implications of the new technologies will be available in a consumer society. It is inevitable. It must not be forgotten that there will be a higher competition from the rest of Europe. This makes it more costly for the owners and cheaper for consumers. This is, of course, the goal of the goods will even reduce expenditure. Despite this, we should not forget that the disparities are growing in the world, and people who have really much money earn more and yet we have some of the world who can not even write or read. Because they do not have to attend a school. Lyon takes up the positive changes in the form of strike, but is this money hysteria sound? I myself do not believe it, I think Lévinas wrote that some people are constantly hungry because they are never satisfied but are always striving to get more and more, then will it never satisfied during his lifetime. How many have their dream house and the Dream Car, yes it is he who drives around in a cheap car and still feel satisfaction with it. Konsumismen knows no borders. Shopping is no longer a need in some parts of the world, but pure pleasure in some neighborhoods. Bell distinguishes between economics, politics and culture and see science as driving forces for social change, in contrast to the contemporary "culture" narcismens ", discusses Lyotard science itself as a" form of discourse. " Bell sees science as an aspect of the new "axialprincipen", which is more a pure discourse, it is objective, which in Robert Merton classic illustration. Lyotard puts science in connection with the culture and notes that the commercialization of research results that we get an increase in power, but the bargain we miss the truth. There are no guarantees that the reason may release consequences, unfortunately. The social issue is hardly fair, but instead how much injustice there is, and what can we do about it?
Our postmodern condition is completely linked to the consumption of capitalism, our entire society goes back in time, with large classes and a teacher, as a mass. Brand Clothing is our stamp of status, leisure centers will be shut down, and so on. What is it from this? Chaos.
Question 2: What comes after post modernity? Have we any idea or is it a zero world we live in that Asplund would put it.
I think the book was good on the whole, I feel good about what Johan Asplund writes, he writes in an intellectual way. Of disinterest, I think that the last chapter was a little tough to get through, it would have been enough with a description of Christopher Polhem known works, perhaps above all timekeeping movement, and not all of the copper mine mm. This causes kompeplikationer and I love to solve.
How does the thunder? This is described in Johan Asplunds book. He describes it by the sound recorder and with words like crash, boom and bang. Asplund discusses scientific thinking on the question "How does the thunder?" He thinks about three different answers:
1 - ashes sounds like thunder. It will be a totologi.
2 - ashes sounds like that! It plays a band and recorded sounds of thunder. It gives nothing of the thunder of those who already know word. It gives the sound as it is. It is objectivity that does not give knowledge.
3 - ashes sounds crash, bang, boom. This option gives something about the thunder. It represents the thunder. Scientific knowledge is largely a representation.
He also shows how to achieve these sound effects in a theater, to illustrate them with the illusion. For me, delusion to fool the senses into thinking that it is reality. To achieve this illusion can roll stones in a trälåda with a prior housing of the plate, then a similar sound of thunder. A simpler alternative to bend a plåtbit with wooden handle and then when sheet metal piece goes back to its original form, the sound of thunder. These solutions have certainly been experiments until its contemporary state of "Drottningholm Theater." Which source device produces the most ASHEN sound? This question is felställd. Both devices produced åskljud in slightly different ways. There is no right or wrong answer (Asplund page 42).
He argues that the social sciences is to understand and to science's job is to explain the problem (Asplund, 2003). In my view, it is both vice-versa. Johan use of the term intelligibilitet and curiosité. These two concepts do not distinguish between explaining and understanding. They are more a concept of curiosity and / or inquisitivness. This makes it a little difficult to understand. An understanding leads us to feel compassion for the person in question and that you then have the opportunity to identify themselves to the other person. This can then lead to the possibility of an intellectual momentum which then becomes an important reason to ask new questions and formulate new answers. This curiosity is an important ingredient to push society forward, there is no curiosity of mankind, so society should stop and not move forward. A small child learns to walk is involved in a process of "instinctive" troubleshooting and as "instinctive" rectification of the resulting errors. This process without so the child would never learn to walk. The same process repeats itself when the child has been a few years older and must learn to cycle. This tested the child's balance. Curious people are doing research and science possible. I would not, of course, argue that a child learns to walk or cycle to be considered as a scientist or researcher. What I want to say is that there is a continuum that extends from child to learn to walk or cycle to the programmer who became Nobel laureates in physics or another and is impossible or unnecessary to point to any particular point in this continuum and say exactly this adopt process engineering or closure of the "scientific" nature.
A concept I settled on in this book was "Simulacrum", I will sort out the concept of significance. Simulacrum must be such that it creates an experience of the striking similarity and at the same time an experience of the discrepancy between illusion and reality. I was yesterday in fifty årsfest, when it was announced that a surprise was on its way after dinner. It came in a man who resembled a priest, should we ask now, I thought. After a moment he took out a bag with rope and a deck of cards, etc.. Then, it was up to me he will conjure for us, I thought no more about it. Suddenly, it was up to me. This is a simulacrum, we see what he does, but still can not understand it. The whole thing is an illusion to the eye, but nonetheless real. His art is to trick our minds to see what he wants us to see and hide their dexterity. It all seems to be an illusion to the eye. Is the answer dexterity that makes it all seems an illusion / art. For me, the answer is YES, whether the painting, magic or mm film. Is a photograph a simulacrum? No, it is not because it tells the truth according to what happens in reality but an illusion. Actually, it is odd to say that a photograph is similar to the avfotograferade motive. The concept of equality requires quietly concept of difference, therefore, duality, according to Lévinas. It is an image and image. Art can be truthful but not, it is an illusion created by this uncertainty to know or not know. It goes without saying that the absence of any discrepancy does nothing new or unexpected has been said. Inventing simulacrum is a very special way to seek knowledge. The products of this knowledge quest are "similarities", similarities involving differences. Simulacrum is like dreaming. Asplund writes the following: the requirement that a simulacrum is not to coincide with what is IMITATE or ILLUSION seems to me far met the "Night Ride". Synesthesia is a person who can make the link visual hearing, but not auditory perception, and vice versa. A synestetisk experience is conscious. Synestetikern have - acute and accidental - experience of a certain color when a certain figure is displayed while a person who has learned to respond with a certain color indication when a certain figure shows have no such experience. Synesthesia is permanent. A synestetiker linking not on one occasion a certain figure with a certain color, and on another occasion the same figure with a different color. The perception is always the same and changed not long time, it is like in old age as it was in childhood. Addicts can get temporary Synesthesia in the use of mescaline and LSD. Humans can also suffer from this condition at the famine at SUNBURN or so. Synestetikern is not mentally ill and can function quite normally in everyday life. Polhem I will not say so much, he was a practitioner who was employed by the king during his time. He was not good at making plans, but he was himself trained, one can say. He was technically smart and dexterous, responsive and so on. On his trips abroad he received additional ideas on various projects such as how to transport materials from the mine mm.
Question 1: Is it possible to manipulate a sense of fully or all of your senses? Is it really, it is not often on the ignorance of the subject. To see things that do not conform with reality.
This book of Lyon describes in a good way developments in a concise format. The book is somewhat confusing Middle otherwise interesting? It captures many well-known sociologists, philosophers, politicians and psychologists.
Post modernity is a concept in today's Western world is described as a globalized world. Post modernity is an idea, cultural, social, and / or perhaps a combination of all three? Lyons writes that he adopts pre, modern and postmodern in a complex interaction. The post is the successor of the modern. It is modern capitalism. It is probably the traditional society in the feudal. Modern society is different from the pre with the pencil's economy, objective relationships between people, big city life, industrialization, individualization, rational thinking. A highly significant number of Western ideas, starting with "Providence", which turned into "progress" and then transferred to the "nihilism". Providence seeks to God's care for the world after its creation, how God oversees historical progress as it moves toward a specific goal. It may be worth serious analytical distinction between post-modernism, with a focus on the cultural, and post modernity, where the social is at the center. The first suggestion that a new kind of society "was taking shape came from Daniel Bell. The new industrial society had taken off in the late 1960s and was based mainly on theoretical knowledge, was formerly the hands especially when working with. The past industrialization would turn into an information society, and this by including new information technologies and communications technologies. The intellectual power would do whatever muscle power had done during the revolution. Bell believes that the post INDUSTRIALISM in fact contributed to the emergence of post modernity. Nihilism is not halted by the delight of services, computers and television, rather, he exploited the possibilities with this. But there were cultural contradictions within capitalism. He stressed that the rationality would be good, and thus could get a new HEDONISM to flourish. The implications of the new technologies will be available in a consumer society. It is inevitable. It must not be forgotten that there will be a higher competition from the rest of Europe. This makes it more costly for the owners and cheaper for consumers. This is, of course, the goal of the goods will even reduce expenditure. Despite this, we should not forget that the disparities are growing in the world, and people who have really much money earn more and yet we have some of the world who can not even write or read. Because they do not have to attend a school. Lyon takes up the positive changes in the form of strike, but is this money hysteria sound? I myself do not believe it, I think Lévinas wrote that some people are constantly hungry because they are never satisfied but are always striving to get more and more, then will it never satisfied during his lifetime. How many have their dream house and the Dream Car, yes it is he who drives around in a cheap car and still feel satisfaction with it. Konsumismen knows no borders. Shopping is no longer a need in some parts of the world, but pure pleasure in some neighborhoods. Bell distinguishes between economics, politics and culture and see science as driving forces for social change, in contrast to the contemporary "culture" narcismens ", discusses Lyotard science itself as a" form of discourse. " Bell sees science as an aspect of the new "axialprincipen", which is more a pure discourse, it is objective, which in Robert Merton classic illustration. Lyotard puts science in connection with the culture and notes that the commercialization of research results that we get an increase in power, but the bargain we miss the truth. There are no guarantees that the reason may release consequences, unfortunately. The social issue is hardly fair, but instead how much injustice there is, and what can we do about it?
Our postmodern condition is completely linked to the consumption of capitalism, our entire society goes back in time, with large classes and a teacher, as a mass. Brand Clothing is our stamp of status, leisure centers will be shut down, and so on. What is it from this? Chaos.
Question 2: What comes after post modernity? Have we any idea or is it a zero world we live in that Asplund would put it.
Kommentarer
Trackback
