Through my research into pseudo-intellectualism as it is conceptualized by today’s society, I have identified two many features that make an argument pseudo-intellectual. The first being; a foundation in some sort of reasoning or logic, and the second being the use of faulty rhetorical appeals in order to make a claim. These arguments are usually made to provide the consumers of these philosophies with a sense of both meaning and purpose; this is done in order to combat a sense of meaningless and unfulfillment in today’s modern world.
What separates an intellectual from that of a pseudo-intellectuals, is how the latter will base their argument on facts and reasoning, but will then use faulty rhetoric in the formation of their arguments. Aristotle conceptualizes rhetoric as; ethos, pathos, and logos. These three forms of rhetoric are understood as; an appeal to credibility, emotion, and logic. All forms of arguing rely on a least one of these forms, and sound arguments can be built using these three rhetorical forms. Pseudo-intellectuals, on the other hand, attempt to use these rhetorical forms, in an unjust manner in order to fully persuade the listener of their point.
In today’s pop-culture the pseudo-intellectuals that often get the most attention are the ones that use these faulty methods of reasoning to evoke a sense of meaning and purpose in the audiences that listen to them. It may seem harmless, but because they do this, they are given a lot of unwarranted attention and authority when it comes to social and academic topics. This allows them to speak on things they aren’t fully qualified on, which can divert social discussion to that of semantics, which then dissolves social discussions to that of arguing for the sake of proving a point. This in turn, creates a divide in society.
It is important to be able to identify pseudo-intellectual arguments because they can be very enticing, due to the fact that they are based on reason, and promise the listener with a sense of meaning. But because they aren’t sound conclusive arguments, if ever placed under scrutiny by anyone knowledgeable, they will crumble along with what meaning they provided.
Category: Abstracts
Object – The object I will be examining is to do with the question of medical treatment and prioritisation in UK hospitals, in relation to a pandemic scenario such as covid-19 pandemic.
Aim:
How – I am applying different ethical concepts to the question of prioritisation in order to find which one will be the most helpful in deciding which patients to treat.
Why – I am looking at this because it has been a very relevant problem during the Covid-19 pandemic. Hopefully I can find the best way to prioritise patients
Concepts & thinkers:
Fletcher – situations ethics
Mill – Rule Utilitarianism
Foucault – Biopolitics and governmentality
Main sources:
Fletcher – Situation Ethics: the new morality
Mill – Utilitarianism
NHS
Foucault –The Birth of Biopolitics
Is the way Technology is advancing really “rational-and-desirable”? (A Critique)
A project by Emily Saladin-Crosse. 3rd year, Philosophical studies. Newcastle university, 2021.
[Item Image]
[key words: introjection, consumption of mediated, de-sublimated product and information; deciphering true and false needs; nothing radically new, increasingly; mediated learning…]
“Dear Guests,
As of 2021, we ask for your help for a critical approach to modern-day technology. To bring you up to date… The new “phenomenological playground” is the internet. Via the phone/ screens we consume products: are “fed” information, images, videos, short and long pieces of information all the time, on the news, social media, etc. Every single thing is at arm’s length (literally), just a *click* away: information, product, print, photo, … everything beautiful and ugly, available and accessible. Art, replicated, multiplied, “free”. Same with porn, and fighting. Surveillance is invasive and “normalised”. For instance, online, we give in quite voluntarily to different forms of surveillance, because it looks rational and desirable and it looks like we have choice. In fact, we are recognised as workers and consumers by Tech. The image shown is the one I utilise to demonstrate/ illustrate parts of the multi-layered problem of deciphering true and false needs which poses perhaps more and more of a problem than before because of technological tendencies towards infinity.
‘Everything is functioning’- says Heidegger, but also: ‘All our relationships have become merely technical ones.’ (Der Spiegel Interview, published after his death, 1976). Today, the values of the Enlightenment bombarded with items according to technological interests instead of our own. This is no longer “rational” to Marcuse in his critique of the Enlightenment ‘One-Dimensional Man’ (1964).
It is valuable to look into ideas such Tech reproducing 1-Dimensional thought in individuals and society as a consequence of “introjection” from the outside (a psychoanalytic notion to be examined). Technology and mediated learning would cause a problem for 18th century Rousseau, but the modern-day Rousseau-inspired educational theorists: we hold on to the idea of an analytic over synthetic approach to education. Whether there are true or false needs at all, is also a question to address.
The writing is in the form of a dialogue, online. This is how the forum proceeds:
ACT 0: Positions.
ACT I: The Paradox of Technology.
ACT II: Deciphering True and False Needs.
ACT III: More critique.
Essentialism is a widely debated facet of philosophy, often focused on the role of women in society. However, not often is research concerned with the role of masculinity within essentialism. To see the effect of and on social influence I will be reflecting the concepts of masculinity and essentialism onto film. This is not previously reflected upon categories, and overall the way that feminism can reflect onto masculinity is something that can be helpful to both genders. I will approach this question through an analysis of the films Billy Elliot (2000) and Dead Poets Society (1989) as a microcosmic story of society’s values. These films will enable me to see complete storylines. Also, I will refer to The Wolf of Wall Street (2013) and Goldfinger (1964), and Skyfall (2012), from the Bond franchise as influential storylines for the viewer. It will be approached under the guise of three methodologies, analytic, interpretive, and historical. Between these, I will proficiently examine the argument of essentialism, the idea of masculinity in relation to this, and finally, the way film can illuminate the way we view masculinity. This will be with specific reference to Diana Fuss’ book Essentially Speaking (1989) to frame the essentialism argument; also using Andrea Waling’s discourse around ‘toxic’ and ‘healthy’ masculinities. The addition of Locke’s idea of ‘nominal’ versus ‘real’ essence and Luce Irigaray’s input on feminism of difference all integrate to form a coherent basis from which to analyse and interpret the selection of films and draw conclusions. The concluding finding is that film is an integral lens through which we can view society and the demonization of femininity that evolves from the negative masculinity we continue to idealise. This is important to explore as previously the literature has fallen short of showing the practical ends film can lead to, and the importance of delineating the way we view essence even if it is a foundational part of knowledge.
I wanted to investigate online surveillance and how it asserts power and reduces autonomy
Richard Ramirez, otherwise known as the infamous “Night Stalker”, once stated in an interview that ‘we have all got the power to kill in our hands, but most of us are afraid to use it. Those who aren’t, control life itself’. The first person to conceptualise evil was St Augustine, who believed in the metaphysical concept that evil was a necessary part of the world, for one cannot have good without evil. They both must coexist to create a balanced structure, thus describing evil within humans. The existence of evil is something that most humans view as destruction and nothingness, hence why they dislike the thought that it could reside within them. However, without evil in the world, there would be no conception of reality. If anything, good can only be praised as something which is not evil. Good is not a concept that guarantees happiness or fulfilment, and it is a concept that guarantees a lack of destruction.
This project will focus on the different contemporary theories of evil action regarding the concept of evil to deduce whether Richard Ramirez was justified in his claims about humanity and murder. BBC News claims that ‘over three decades in the late 20th century, there was a rise in serial homicides in North America’, explicitly suggesting that ‘a rise in serial killings [started] in the late 1960s, peaking in the 80s – when there were at least 200 such murderers operating in the United States alone’. This lead several theorists to attempt to offer necessary and sufficient conditions for evil. Some, such as Marcus G. Singer (2002), have focussed on evil as a root of personhood, whilst others, such as Luke Russell (2014), consider evil to be action-based.
The first part of this project will focus on the concept of evil and harmful wrongdoing. This chapter assumes that actions can be evil in themselves or that actions can be considered as ‘wrong’ in themselves. This chapter will then lead to evil and harm where it will be argued that evil must ‘cause or allow significant harm to at least one victim’. This part of the project will be crucial in deciphering whether evil is necessary within a person to cause another individual harm otherwise understood as quasi-deontological ethics. Then will continue into the concept of evil and motivation, which will delve into desire as a motive within a human mind, whether evil is a desire or something innate within us, otherwise known as consequentialist ethics. Evil could belong either to souls or to acts; if the former, there need be no consequences, if the latter, then evil is necessarily consequential. The next part of this chapter will focus on evil and its effect; this chapter focuses on the emotions humans must provide to commit murder and whether emotions must be involved to create evil. This chapter will conclude that evil resides within the soul rather than within the consequences of human action.
Then most importantly, the project will end with a chapter on evil and responsibility, which will focus on how evil resides in the soul using the classic argument of nature versus nurture. This will argue on behalf of ignorance, when people do not understand that what they are doing is wrong or when humans do something wrong by mistake and without intention. Then it will argue on behalf of psychopathy, where humans struggle to feel remorse for their actions which therefore makes it harder for them to act in a way which is socially acceptable. It will argue on behalf of upbringing, as evil could be distilled in childhood and traumatic experiences from a young age. This will be the crucial part of the essay in tying together the conclusion as to whether it has been ‘universally accepted that to perform an evil action an agent must be morally responsible for what she does’ unless that is of a natural event; however, there are other responsibilities for evil actions.
In this investigation, I answer my object of the extent to which the British Media has invaded the lives of the public. Is there a need to limit the freedom of the press, what has been done and what is left to do to ensure the protection of ordinary people? Using texts by Jeremy Bentham and the work of Hannah Arendt as my philosophical insight, I ask, are we too reliant on the press to pass us our information and if so who is to blame for the politically fuelled hate campaigns that arise towards certain groups, individuals and sectors in our society spearheaded by the media?
From its roots, phenomenology has tended towards an anthropocentric view of the world. This much is true in as far as we think of the phenomenological subject as a solely human entitlement which cannot be transplanted onto other modes of being such as that of the animal or vegetal realms.
Plants in themselves have been reduced, in the past, to objects for the human subject both in our experience of them directly (Husserl, for example, talks of trees in Ideas I, only referring to them as objects in their own right), and in their material advantages to us as commodities and resources.
Goethe made a step towards understanding the world of plants in and of themselves in his philosophical application of botanical orientated scientific, observational study. In his Metamorphosis of Plants, he explains how the elemental life force, striving or ‘conatus’ of plants is the basis for vegetal ontology and is akin to a sort of rationality in plants.
Michael Marder recognizes how plants present a specific challenge to western philosophy, especially phenomenology, and, in his book, Plant Thinking, problematizes the reductionary relation between the human world and that of vegetal being.
Human and plant interactions in the world are ontologically estranged from one another which necessarily calls us into an ethical state of being with regards to Nature as a unifying concept. The ecopsychological application of the Buddhist world view of Ahimsa and dependent origination allows a different reading of ontological alterity within Nature to that of Marder.
In this study we shall look at the temporal character of vegetal ontology as a route for acceptance of plant life as a conceptual authority in and of itself. By informing a critique of Marder’s revolutionary ethical stance towards vegetal being with a meditative contemplation of the world around us, based in Zen Buddhism; I hope to show how human’s experience of the world can benefit from understanding plant’s interaction with the world. I shall also consider how this change in perspective to our relationship with plants and their being-in-the-world could have a positive outcome in terms of conservation and environmental ethics.
In this project, I will start out by analysing the origin and structure of conspiracy theories in general. I will then conduct an analysis of the data regarding public opinion on various issues within the pandemic, using the previous sections to create assertions which aim to explain the statistical trends seen in figures 1-4. In search of providing a competent method to demarcate between warranted and unwarranted conspiracy theories — I will appeal to Karl Popper’s falsification principle, with attention also paid to his conception of conspiracy theories. Unintentionally, throughout my research, I have come to speculate that the real concern is not so much these obviously unfalsifiable conspiracies that the media would have you believe are incredibly prevalent — but the deflection away from the competence and authority of the government. I will reference Giorgio Agamben’s thoughts on this emerging structure of totalitarianism present within the government and argue that we ought not propose these unified conspiracy theories which require stretches of the imagination — but simply that we should approach the media and government with an unbiased eye, doing justice to the data in front of us.
Was Harry Potter predetermined to be the chosen one? Or is it down to free will.. or more fate?
A philosophical investigation in the response carried out by the USA, the UK & New Zealand against Coronavirus
In 1967, French literary theorist and cultural critic Roland Barthes asserted The Death of the Author. Representing a call for a diminished heed in reviewing the backdrop of the author when interpreting a text, he states the reader as the only place where such meaning within a text can accumulate. It is through the Internet meme, “groups of items sharing common characteristics of content and form” (Williams, 2020, 4), we see this call met. Addressing Foucault’s “author-function” argument, we see the meme detach from the author’s stipulation — in its being propagated on the Internet, participation in the creation of work no longer holds regard to an author. Instead, we see memes created, propagated, spread, remixed, edited, actions integral to the digital experience, allowing the meme to standalone as a piece of work in its own utterance, it is not simply an original piece but woven in it lies countless threads of culture. In detailing Pepe, the Frog meme, we find memes represent a collective cultural experience: different groups rally over the Internet to depict meaning to a piece of work, presenting differing composition of cultures, none of which original. Thus, in the Internet age, the birth of the reader is in full stride, presenting the author as truly dead, in the context of the collective ownership of memes.
My project’s territory is desire, and the object of this enquiry is the film Festen by Thomas Vinterberg. Festen showcases a family’s revelation to its secrets and traumatic past. The film was the first film made under the influence of the rules of Dogme 95 Movement. The aesthetics of the film are directly influenced by the strict rules of the movement. From the aesthetics of the film, I started my examination of the film in order to uncover a new understanding of desire. The conceptual tools that I utilised for this intellectual exploration are found in two primary texts. The first text, written by Gilles Deleuze, is Cinema 2: The Time-Image. This text provided a philosophical taxonomy of cinematic images that indicated a way the aesthetics of a film can be understood. The second, and more central text, is Anti-Oedipus. This text was written by Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari and it features an extensive critique of the psychoanalytic discourse and a new conceptual image of desire.My project’s main objective is to present the novel image of desire, as seen in Festen, with the aid of the two philosophical texts. The film is interested in the idea of the family and all things that are attached to it. Through my examination, I uncovered how closely attached is desire to the family. Festen, seemingly, unpacks this conception of desire and reveals the repressive implications of such conception.The result of my examination is a new, and more open, picture of desire that can reverse the negative and repressive implications of the familial conception of desire that was previously established.
The desire for control is the aetiological thread that links the asceticism of medieval women and the asceticism of the anorexic woman. The lives of medieval women are characterised by a lack of control of the self. They were defined by their role as ‘body’ where men were ‘spirit’ and therefore destined to become subservient wives valued on their bodily processes. Like the medieval ascetic, the anorexic seeks to conform to the slenderness ideal that originated in response powerful intuitions exerting power over women. To be slender meant to resist democratic forms of power such as consumerism and to control desire where the regulation of such felt out of one’s control. Through Nietzsche’s notions of The Ascetic Ideal, it is understood that asceticism forms out of human suffering and conflict and focuses on empowering existence through control. Control of the body by abstaining from food therefore becomes an active yet inward facing form of resistance over institutions that have dominated women’s lives.
Over the course of my project I will be answering one of the most relevant and controversial questions of the 21st century. This question is a personal one as I hope to follow a career in the direction of environmental business and sustainability.
The aim is if ethics in our lives have positive or negative consequences. I will be discussing the environmental work of modern ethical philosophers such as Peter Singer and Thom Brooks whose work starts to lay out if there is a way of stopping environmental change if ethics are used in our lives.
I will be using Singer’s utilitarian approach and Brook’s political philosophy to truly discover the ways in which we can or if we can prevent worsening the environmental change problem.
I have chosen these particular philosophers as they single out the facts and problems with environmental change in both an ethical and moral perspective. They equally have two individual philosophies and ethical solutions which gives the project two very different sides to contrast.
Singer’s utilitarian and consequentialist theories and workings plays a valuable part in linking Bentham and Mill’s older utilitarian works. Brook’s political and activist philosophy gives the statistical analysis of the damage of environmental change and this aids in his conclusion, that basing ethics in our lives will slow the damage that environmental change has on the planet.
I have chosen an interpretive approach to my methodology with the analysis of both Singer’s ‘Practical Ethics’ and Brook’s ‘Climate Change Ethics for an Endangered World’. These books have a number of comparisons with other philosophers and their theories which gives many different angles to display support for my view that ethics in our lives has a positive effect on environmental change.
These ethical solutions and theories I have applied to what I believe are the core ethical dilemmas which environmental change either negatively affects or that contribute to these negative effects. The areas I have chosen are the effects on the animal species and the plant species, and also the affects that businesses and governments have on contributing to environmental change in the past and present.
Object/Territory – The concept of Law, how Natural Law Theory and Legal Positivism have shaped the English Legal System
Aim – Through a historical account I aim to provide a historical account of both Natural Law Theory and Legal Positivism in order to assess the impact that they have had on shaping the modern English Legal System
Main Sources – Plato, Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, John Austin, H. L. A Hart
In this essay I shall explore the very concept of law and morality as I look at the very concept of law, morality and how law is applied in order to argue that Natural Law Theory and Legal Positivism are the main driving forces behind the formation of a distinct English Legal System.
The concept of death is one that philosophers have looked into since the ancient Greeks. Similarly to other topics, such as God, the soul and the universe, death and the afterlife is one that we will never fully understand. Both religious and non-religious ideas have formed relating to what different groups and thinkers believe happen after death, and this also intrudes on discussions relating to who we really are- whether we are only our body, only our mind, or a mixture of both. Certainly in the 21st Century, not only do we have the many writings of previous thinker’s opinions on death and the afterlife, but with medical advancements, we also have the experiences of some who have died and been resuscitated- many of whom speak about the overwhelming feeling of peace, welcomeness, support and even recall images of their past, calming settings and a bright light. However, there are previous philosophers, for instance Epicurus, who we will see later, doesn’t believe that death is something that we experience, thus we cannot ever truly know what happens after we die. Freud builds on this with his idea, asserting that humanity cannot imagine not existing as a thinking thing, therefore will fantasise attending their own funeral, which could also explain the experiences of those who have passed on and been resuscitated. Essentially, there is a suggestion that their beliefs about death could have an impact on what they believe they experience in the afterlife.
In this essay, I will discuss non-religious and religious views about the afterlife, as well as arguments for the possibility of reincarnation, from a range of different philosophical thinkers. I will explore this deeper through employing secondary sources that critically analyse these arguments and review how valid these arguments may be.
The issue of income inequality is becoming increasing prevalent within today’s society, currently the world’s richest 1% have more than twice as much wealth as 6.9 billion people, and nowhere on earth is this situation more problematic than America.
Within my project I investigate American society and the socio-economic practices it has adopted over the last 200 years. I used the books The Theory of The Leisure Class, The Affluent Society, and What Money Can’t Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets, as together they create a timeline of how this western society’s economic and social practices have evolved. This allowed me to unpack some of the key practices which have directly impacted the American wealth gap. Such as: Conspicuous Consumption, Mass-Production, Aggressive Advertising and Commodification
Furthermore, the practices highlighted within my chosen texts allowed me to use the theories of Karl Marx, Herbert Marcuse, and John Rawls to investigate the exploitative aspects inherent to them. I used , Marx’s The Communist Manifesto, Das Kapital and other collected works, along with Marcuse’s One-Dimensional Man as well as Rawls’ Justice as Fairness: A Restatement and A Theory of Justice to find out how these thinkers would find these practices exploitative.
Ultimately, I attempt to display how exploitation is a common a characteristic to all socio-economic practices which have impacted the American wealth gap over the last 200 years.
My Object is Covid-19 mental health, as I believe that mental health has not had enough importance throughout the Covid-19 pandemic. I highlight this pressing issue using psychological studies that show the link between Lockdown and mental health.
Project Aim:
To use my philosophical concepts to offer solutions at mitigating the effects of Covid-19 mental health, I shall not be suggesting that the physical effects of the virus should be disregarded.
Within my project, I use two philosophical concepts – Jean-Paul Sartre’s existentialism and Ayn Rand’s rational egoism.
Sartre’s existentialism focuses on our own individual freedom as he claims that we do not have a general human essence to conform to. Sartre also has insights into why we experience anxiety which include factors such as abandonment and responsibility, all feelings exaggerated within a lockdown.
Ayn Rand’s rational egoism denies selfishness as an evil motive, and instead, Rand promotes placing oneself first in order to gain a clear conscience to make rationally informed decisions. Our integrity and values will ensure that making selfish decisions will not lead to immoral acts, and therefore we should be making more selfish decisions.
What is the most morally acceptable and workable solution, regarding the method of imprisonment as a means of punishment?