An exploration into punk, its roots, its philosophy and where it is now.
Category: Stage 3
Is someone who finds a tribal scarring ceremony beautiful wrong or justified to believe whatever they choose? This includes an exploration of the concept of beauty and its dimensions. Beauty will be mainly discussed in terms of the female; it is aimed towards beauty as a concept in modern times, regarding appearance rather than the aesthetics of art. The overall thesis of this discussion is that beauty, controversial as it can be, is in the eye of the beholder and therefore different cultures, times and context all have varying priorities and values regarding beauty. Chapter 1 What is beauty? The philosophical arguments regarding beauty. Different philosophical theories ranging from Plato to Kant and Santayana, concluding that the modern perspective is that beauty is subjective. However, is beauty the actual object or the feeling connected with beauty? Kirwin argues that the sensation of beauty is universal and therefore while the object is subjective the sensation is not. The biological argument, initiated by Darwin, that people perceive beauty in humans with regard to biological advantage is also discussed- does this make human beauty universal, what about homosexuals? Chapter 2 Case study-Warie Dirie, a description of infibulation and the cultural arguments surrounding it within a specific case. Debate on the justification of female circumcision, what are the concepts of beauty within this tradition? Chapter 3 Cosmetic surgery, its massive growth throughout the last ten years-why is it so popular-what are the aims, the problematization of age-what does this imply about beauty. Chapter 4 Feminist arguments about beauty, is beauty a ‘beauty myth’? Are women subordinated by the pressure to conform to an ideal? The aims and art of Orlan-challenging beauty through cosmetic surgery. Chapter 5 Different practices within cultures that are either beautifying or mutilating. A look at the rise in body modification through tattoos, piercings and scarification, what are the aims of these modifiers-to challenge cultural norms? Is it cultural imperialism to class something alien to us as mutilation? A discussion of whether or not one can impose a view upon another culture without being imperialist, a comparison of foot binding with female circumcision. Is beauty ideology? A glimpse at power through the eyes of Foucault, Lenin, Lukes and Marx. Conclusion-what does this all imply about beauty. A parallel between beauty and deformation with Calabrese’s notion of the neo-baroque and replicants, a homogenising of society. Harvey’s postmodern consumerist world. The Dove Report, what do Western women really feel about beauty. Philosophical implications of the differing viewpoints regarding beauty and perfection. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder??
Objectives: How much is our present day society increasingly reliant on simulations for its reality? What affect does this have with regards to the individual and society as a whole? Method: I will look at how far society is controlled by mediations with regard to the television for example, as our main source of gaining knowledge about the world, and how this leads to the notion of risk society and the current climate of obsessive individualisation. My main aims are to explore the outcomes of simulations in postmodernity with regard to the importance of the image and the increasing occurrence of territorialisation, particularly in everyday activities such as the foods that we eat and the goods which we consume. Sources: Ulrich Beck, Risk Society, Jean Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulations, David Harvey, The Condition of Postmodernity, George Ritzer, The McDonaldization Thesis, Don Delillo, White Noise.
My territory of investigation is the military and its members, including regular soldiers, regiment officers and commanding officers. The concept is morality and freedom of will within the military society. The ethical and moral basis that the military lives by is all very well in order to justify the actions taken by the military but can a soldier just ignore his own morals and values and live in a system where morals are dictated? The soldier loses his freedom of morality in a strict society where unquestioning obedience is a requirement and all decisions are made for the individual. The army operates on a system of discipline, loyalty and mutual trust. These combined make the military an efficient and organised system but are the requirements for soldier’s realistic? A main source I have been using is the Military Covenant, which shows the moral component of the army and the inner qualities needed to be a soldier, such as selfless commitment, courage, discipline, integrity and loyalty. These qualities are brought out by and taught by the leaders but how much responsibility do they have? Are they just the pawns of the people above them in the hierarchy? These questions all lead back to the notion of freedom of morals. I have used Hegelian philosophy through out this study to help answer the above questions. The Philosophy of Right is used in order to highlight the importance of freedom as only belonging to a social being who partakes in ethical life, only in this sense is the individual truly a person. Therefore taking away this freedom, like in the military, the person loses what makes them human. According to Hegel the will is essentially free. This distinguishes us from animals, having purposes and striving deliberately to achieve them. The society that we live in plays a large part in forming our wants and desires and Hegel never loses sight of this. His theory of abstract freedom shows how we do as we please in a state of freedom that is pushed to and fro by the social and historical forces of our times. This is an important point in relation to the freedom of will in the military as it supports the idea that soldiers do choose to limit free will but in doing so open themselves up to a different society where individual choice is limited but it is maybe just an extreme version of the society that we all live in where our choices are shaped by our society. A key change that highlights freedom of choice and morality is the difference between an autocratic society, such as Germany under the rule of Hitler in the 1930’s and 1940’s, and the democratic society of Britain today. There is a huge difference in the military styles; Hitler ruled his military with a dictatorship that called for ‘blind obedience’ whereas any democratic society portrays freedom of choice and initiative. My objective is to discover if these two military systems are really that different in how a soldier is expected to obey orders based on military morals and believe in them fully. Is it possible for a human being to give up their values and morals in order to commit themselves fully to a strict military society? Are our morals really that flexible?
Traditional Objections to Suicide which I Intend to Challenge: 1. Human life is sanctified, therefore it is wrong to commit suicide. 2. Suicide is wrong because it is selfish. 3. Man is made in the image of God, therefore it is wrong to take your own life. 4. When we die is God’s decision, not ours, therefore suicide is wrong. 5. Suicide is wrong because it deprives society of an otherwise useful citizen. 6. Suicide is wrong because it is ‘unnatural’. 7. Suicide is wrong because it is a form of murder. 8. ‘Life is a gift from God’, therefore suicide is wrong. Why is Suicide Still Stigmatised? 1. The role of the media: Isn’t the media guilty of undermining the seriousness of suicide by expounding sensationalist story-lines, e.g. ‘Tony Blair committed political suicide today’? Isn’t the media also guilty of reinforcing our negative feelings towards suicide to dramatise a situation e.g. using the term ‘suicide bombers’, instead of ‘martyrs’? Doesn’t the media fail to clarify our own confusions about ‘who’ is to blame when a suicidal act occurs? 2. The semiotics of suicide: Doesn’t the language we use as regards to suicide prejudice our understanding of the term suicide, e.g. the verb ‘to commit’ reminds us of the notion of crime (reiterated by the fact that suicide was only made legal in 1961 in England) and the fact that someone who attempts suicide is considered to be a “victim” is a difficult notion to comprehend given that a victim is someone who usually has something wrongful done to them – not someone who inflicts a wrongful action onto themselves. 3. Is the solution more immoral than the problem?: Whilst we are forced to acknowledge that suicide is a problem that has to be dealt with, given our extensive research of the subject, the problem comes with trying to implement a solution. One commentator has suggested the notion of pre-emptive incarceration based upon statistical analysis of suicides? Yet, how problematic would this be? Are the statistics too broad? Or are they too specific? Is it ethical to incarcerate someone because they are a potential suicide? Does the notion of incarceration revert back to the idea that suicide is a crime? What about the financial aspects of such a scheme? Can such a scheme make any real difference given that the existing methods of dealing with suicides (e.g. telephone services) are largely ineffective? Does the solution lie in a re-structuring of society, as Durkheim suggests? What are the consequences of such a re-structuring? 4. “God is Dead” (Nietzsche), and “Life is Absurd” (Camus) but suicide remains stigmatised: When “God died”, we may have expected the traditional rejection of suicide based upon religious (in particular, Christian) arguments to die with him. Yet, this did not happen. This suggests that Christianity did not install within us a sense that “killing is wrong”; what it does suggest, however, is that this sense of repulsion towards murder (in this case, self-murder) is innate within us – Christianity merely provided the vehicle by which to expound this view. Thus, when “God dies”, our prohibitions remained.
Aim To discover the importance of contemporary television broadcasting to the nature of our society and culture. Objectives 1. To explore the key concept of ideology as interpreted by poststructuralists such as Foucault and Althusser as well as the Gramscian notion of hegemony. 2. To investigate the way that we are unconsciously manipulated into receiving cultural values and class position by the world around us. To show that existing within the context of a society dominated by the influence of a capitalist media engine shapes the normative conditions of these evaluations, and illustrate how constant change allows modern capitalist society to revamp and perpetuate itself through self-referential discourse. 3. To trace some of the patterns and phenomena in our modern media. To establish what might have caused the proliferation and success of ‘reality television’ and the cult of celebrity. To understand how television invades our homes and turns us into consumers in our own front room, transforming unique individuals into aspiring capitalists engaged in the systematic labour of production and consumption. Method Close reading of texts such as Foucault’s ‘The Archaeology of Knowledge’ and ‘Power/Knowledge’ and Gramsci’s ‘Selections from the Prison Notebooks’ as well as an examination of recent trends in television and the effects of modern celebrity on individuality.
A look into the shifted ideals of religion, human spirituality and the replacement of conventional religion with new spiritualities. Objectives To investigate what has happened to religious belief since the enlightenment. How conventional religion has slowly throughout the last two hundred years become fragmented and changed along with its effect on human spirituality. The damage that the enlightenment did to major religions. The effect lack and subsequent regaining of faith In new and different ways. Our attitude to religion has changed so far, that although we now believe ourselves to be free of its grasp, we are more under its thrall. Concepts: Replacement of Religion, shifting role of religion and human frailty of will. Territory: Religion throughout Europe since the Enlightenment
There is currently a spectre haunting the modern world, whose presence demands the attention of socioeconomic, political and intellectual institutions to which it is opposed. It has claimed thousands of lives, initiated wars, undermined international law and called into question modernity’s ideological foundations; and yet, discourse on terror has failed to confront its true origins. Knee-jerk condemnation and bureaucratic rationality continue to dominate responses, manufacturing consent while excluding any form of self-reflexivity or discussion. In situating terrorism in the dialectic of modernity, this project aims to assert the absolute necessity of such a re-evaluation in finding a solution. Key themes • Problems of the inherited language: Towards redefinition of ‘Terrorism’ • The legacy of the Enlightenment and the task of Philosophy. • Power bases and the assertion of legitimacy. Fundamentalism vs. Liberty. • Towards a resolution: forums of discussion and devolution and hospitality
Fear has always been with us. Fear has always been used in politics, as a means to control, both for the good and for the bad. Hobbes: The fear of the state of nature, led the people to accept a sovereign. Montesquieu: The fear of the tyrannical despot means people are bound to democracy. Tocqueville: Fears of the consequences of being ostracised by society mean people have conformed to the tyrannical majority. 9/11 has brought about a new kind of fear in the people of the U.S.A. It caused paranoia about a devastating attack from an anonymous face to spread through society. The people in their abject fear have turned to the government to protect them. The style of government they have chosen that they feel will protect them best is a new brand of conservatism, one that is even further right on the political spectrum; this government is Neoconservatism. What of this regime that is here to save us? It again marks a change in society. For centuries in western societies we have moved towards progressively freer societies. The implementation of a Neoconservative government, has changed this, we are seeing the abolition of civil liberties, no trial by jury, the detainees of suspects in prison for years without charge. This is not peculiar to the U.S buts its influence as the one true super power is immense, and it has sparked similar policy changes elsewhere. The political thinker Leo Strauss has heavily influenced neoconservatives. In particular his doctrine on natural right. We must try and understand the work of Leo Strauss, if we are to understand what the people find so attractive about this style of government. The Neoconservatives are particularly influential in the areas of defence and foreign policy, the two key areas for the protection of the U.S.A from the “axis of evil”. Again we must turn to Strauss to understand how his philosophy has influenced the policies that affect us all today.
When a human being contracts AIDS, their DNA is replaced, and their very existence becomes deficient. In a cold light, it is a murderous disease but the reality is that the negation of viral infection only delays evolution. Nietzsche argued with and against Darwin on the nature of natural selection, and made the will to power applicable to more than just the human being. Highlighting the development of AIDS since the 1980s, I will show how diseases are able to shape society and evolve beings in a network of complexity theory created by the “self-organised behaviours of complex genetic regulatory systems”.
Territory & Field of Exploration This project will discuss the field of contemporary architecture. I want to discuss some of the major challenges that face the contemporary architect in relation to his particular ‘way of thinking’ about the problems of designing in our technological age. In Our Modern Technological Age, Can Contemporary Architecture truly appeal to The Heideggerian Notion of Dwelling? Aims & Objectives. • I will discuss Heidegger’s essay ‘Building. Dwelling, Thinking’ in order to reveal the nature of Heidegger’s notion of dwelling. • This project will discuss in detail the relationship between Building & Dwelling in order to adopt a ‘way of thinking’ about the challenge of building that may be applicable in the contemporary world. • I will discuss Heidegger’s use of ‘the poetic’, and ask weather or not there is the possibility in our contemporary world for ‘poetic building’ • This project will discuss the affect of modernity on Heidegger’s notion of dwelling, my focus will rest specifically on mans ‘homelessness’.
Objectives: • To what extent has this notion of rights evolved over time, from the ancient Greeks to the present day? • To what extent do non-human animals possess legal and/or moral rights? • Depending on whether animals do or do not possess legal and/or moral rights I will determine why it is that they do, or do not possess these rights and what has changed. Structure: 1st Chapter: I will trace the notion of ‘Rights’ through the Western Philosophical Tradition from Aristotle to Darwin. I will determine whether or not they believed animals to possess intrinsic value and moral standing; did animals possess rights and if they did not, did they believe that they should. 2nd Chapter: I will look at the 1970’s onwards, what has been referred to as ‘the Greening of Philosophy.’ To what extent has the notion of moral consideration for animals changed? Do animals possess rights, if so, do they possess significantly more rights? 3rd Chapter: I will determine whether animals do, or do not possess legal rights and/or moral rights? Why is it that they do, or do not possess these rights and to what extent has this notion of ‘Rights’ changed? Change: I will look at the 1970’s as the key change as there was an emergence of interest in environmental philosophy and the belief in both moral consideration and moral standing for animals. I will examine to what extent there has been a change in both legal rights and moral rights for animals. Did they and/or do they possess such rights? If there has been a change, Why? Sources: Law Relating to Animals, Brooman and Legge. The Rights of Nature, Nash. Rights, Jones. Animal Rights and Human Obligations, Regan and Singer. Respect for Nature A Theory of Environmental Ethics, Taylor. Animal Rights – a Symposium, Ryder. Environmental Ethics, What Really Matters, What Really Works, Schmidtz and Willot.
This project will address the transition in human mediation between self, society and world affected by the transition from religious mediation to financial mediation. The problem will be posed from the perspective of circulation and the historical consequences suspected to arise from unrestricted human interaction. Broadly speaking the project will focus on; *The framing of transgression and taboo in Hittite, Scriptural, Roman, Ecclesiastical and British Civil law *The Council of Elvira and the formulation of the principle of una cara by Basil the Great *The birth of the Bank of England and consequent transfer of value and mediation *The contemporary economic situation which, with the demand for deregulation of markets and increasing tendency toward investment in areas of low governance leaves social mediation almost entirely up to finance and credit- the promise of value rather than value itself
Territory & Objectives: My project investigates the way in which we impose received value systems upon the world around us, and how those standards are also mapped upon the individual body as carrier of those principles of the dominant societal mode thus affecting our relationships with one another. It shows that living within the context of capitalism shapes the criteria of these docile evaluations, and demonstrates how this system of evaluation self-referentially recourses to fortify the capitalist social system through flux and change. Discussion will move on to consider in detail how locally received examples of information disseminated by globally operating media cartels act to coerce individuals’ lifestyle investment in the authority of the system. This will be orientated by the appraisal of lifestyle magazines, exploring how the discourses of desire within the grand schema of capitalism set standards of normative criteria which are employed in a self-policing system of adherence to what it means to be a good consumer. These various lifestyle aspects by various publications persuade the individual, critically disengaged, to regard themselves as the aspiring capitalist critically engaged in the labour of consumption and therefore active in the formation of their lives and their relationships with other people. Rather than promoting multi-cultural, inter-disciplinary engagement in the process of being, the imperative to consume, saturated throughout commercial repertoires, in fact causes and substantiates rival economies and inequalities between individuals, between factions and at the level of global market forces. Further, the effect of tying consumption, through advertising, to normative standards set, makes it almost impossible to recognise the specificity of an individual. Rather, we evaluate ourselves and others against normative standards which discourage empathy for our fellow man, a state of affairs which may have dire consequences. Finally then, this paper will suggest what possibilities remain for communication between us with a view to the reformation of a networked community in response to the alienation and apathy of the individual in high capitalism. Change: The way in which advertising has tied consumption to normative values which are themselves set with the imperative to consume in mind. The overall effect is to diminish greatly one’s scope for specificity, and to create conflicts of interest. Sources: Foucault, M., The History of Sexuality I: The Will to Knowledge, Penguin, 1998; Foucault, M., The Archaeology of Knowledge, Routledge 1994, Bristol; Foucault, M., Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972-1977, ed. Gordon, C., Pantheon Books 1989, New York; Blanchot, M., Literature and the Right to Death, The Station Hill Blanchot Reader, Station Hill Press 1999, Barrytown; Marx, K., Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx: Selected Writings, Ed. McLellan, D., Oxford University Press 1977
The Invention, Solidification and Reproduction of “Cultural Identity”. – The accumulation of my cultural experiences versus the fresher cultural politic – WHo put the “Rose” in Singleton? Paradigm imitating geographies. For whom the Bell Tolls – Cage Fight: Nostalgia versus Memory versus Myth versus Empiricism. “Cockney” or “Mockney”? – Shared cultural knowledge: THe amalgamation of Nostalgia, Memory, Myth and Empiricism – Normalisation and Determinism – The cultural “other” and oppositional relations. The Capital of Culture – The “Culture Industry” – Fetish Parties – Following the white rabbit: How deep is the hole?
Aims & Objectives: • To examine the way that people on the Autism Spectrum fit into the norms of society and the way that this has affected their identity. • To identify the changing attitudes that have arisen in respect to Autism and the way they have affected inclusion of people with the disorder over time. Structure: I will begin by introducing the notions of self and identity; looking at the structure of society and how a persons identity is developed in response to the prevailing structures. I will then progress to looking at the changing attitudes towards madness from the middle Ages to Modernity. This work will be the foundation for my genealogy of Autism, which will then be the basis on which to examine Autism and its identity in relation to society; the changes that have occurred and the way that these changes have affected the ability of someone with Autism to be part of the society in which they live. The final section of this work will be a case study examining one particular child with Autism; how his identity fluctuates, how he is perceived by those around him, and how this affects his being in respect to the society that he is a part of. Territory: The territory for this work will be the Autism Spectrum and ‘society’. Sources: The main source for this work in respect to society and its perceptions of people with a mental illness will be Michel Foucault’s Madness & Civilization. Wendy Lawson will be one of my most important sources in regards Autism. However, many others from the fields of philosophy, sociology and psychology will be used to support, and elaborate on my ideas.
Part 1: The Development and Awareness of the Individual within Community. Role of Education in the Development of Faith in Children; Interplay of education and faith; Education as a resolution. Part 2: Reassessing/Reconstructing an Ethical Community. A Future Community Ethic; Necessary? Possible? What is needed to construct a future community that meets the required ethic? Aim: Looking at what brings an individual to their moral potential, investigating through faith and education. Territory: Community of South Bailey, Durham, with education and community linked through pre-school to university colleges. Paradigm Shift: Moral and community Sources:Derrida, Foucault Tolstoy, Aquinas
“Using the BBC sitcom the office as a stereotype; a philosophical analysis of the changing conditions power and resistance embrace in the corporate workplace.” Key Concepts/ Words: – Power, ethics, morality, will, resistance, autonomy, freedom, motivation, existence, capitalism, fordism, post-fordism, hybridisation, bureaucracy, red-tape, bio-power, hierarchy, top-down, bottom up, modernity, postmodernity, globalisation. Objectives: – Using the office as a model, I intend to investigate some of the pivotal questions of power, resistance and autonomy which arise when humans interface in the corporate environment. Sources: – Sourcing from books, library journals and internet journals. Original and secondary writings of Nietzsche, Foucault, Heidegger and Machiavelli. – the office first and second series, also related internet sites. – Background reading of business ethics and the condition of postmodernity. Change: – The paradigm shifts between modernity and postmodernity, Fordism and flexible accumulation. How factors such as technological advance, globalization and the drive for ‘the American dream’ affect human behaviour in the business environment. The gap between humans and things: – Man and technology. – The gap between man and the material world. – Man and globalization.
At the end of the nineteenth century Nietzsche was already pointing to dynamic becomings and complexity in the ontology of the human being. For him we are not entities with a transcendent being but an immanent field of forces that are always bound up in different processes. In the past century, advances in computing, mathematics and science have made it possible to study complex and dynamic systems that were dismissed as anomalies under linear models. Bodies are no longer studied in isolation but in dynamic systems that can alter their states, sometimes creating new and surprising features. We move away from singular objects to the study of quasi-objects and folds that can only be considered within their given system. The CApitalist system resembles this state of constant flux and change. There is a constant flow of abstract value and the persistence deterritorialization and reterritorialization of labour power. Within capitalism nothing exists outside of the system and decodings are brought back within a capitalist axiom. Philosophers such as Deleuze and Guattari, Serres, Simondon and DeLanda have taken theories of catastrophe, chaos and folds and reterritorialized them on to the social to explore human activity and phenomena. What emerges is biotechnics; the human is bound up in what DeLanda calls”nonorganic life”. I wish to examine Nietzsche’s process of becoming alongside recent theories of flux, chaos and complexity in the context of our state of “self” within capitalist structures to explore the processes that contribute to our stabilising of the “self” and to determine whether, on an ontological and immanent level, we are continually becoming a different self.
It was Marcel Duchamp who invented the notion ‘art can be anything.’ By looking at the influences through a time shift starting from the Renaissance through to contemporary times examine exactly how true this revolutionary statement is or whether it is a matter of shock value that the Artist of today wants to put across, whereby the skill in drawing and painting has undoubtedly been lost. My aim is to explore the notion ‘art can be anything’ through three different time periods Renaissance, Baroque and Contemporary. The first will be the Renaissance (the early fifteenth century) which focuses on the issues of function and purpose of art. A major criticism with the youth of contemporary art today is the lack of knowledge towards the primitive foundations of art. This knowledge has been replaced with abstract ideas and theories about what art should and should not be. I used various influential names in my introduction to sketch an overall outline to the subject of art. Plato emphasises the ‘capacity of art to perfect nature, to correct in the mind of man the deficiencies of nature.’1 Wollheim and Panofsky said that only humans make art whereas Sir Philip Sidney said ‘The artist often creates things such as never were in nature.’ As a result, given the differing attitudes towards this particular subject the point is made that art is a matter of personal opinion. Using the theory of Utilitarianism I tried to use a system where the individual could categorise high and low art. It was Mill who said that a higher pleasure was one that stimulated the mind. Was it then possible to use this Utilitarian system within art? The higher pleasures of the mind are without doubt more desirable and valuable than those of lower pleasure of the body. Taking this approach the appearance or aesthetic value of a modern piece of art becomes worthless and what becomes important are the effects on the viewer. Utilitarianism is a teleological theory where the consequences are important. In some cases within modern art i.e. conceptualism, the effect can be sublime. Looking at the intention of the artist using Kant’s system of ‘means ends reasoning’ I wanted to look at what makes the moral motive a ‘pure’ motive. This is a disinterested one and it is solely based on the fact that we are motivated to act on the moral law by the moral law itself and not by some self-interested end. The idea of universality is used by Kant to support a theory of moral reasoning. Thus, we are to ask whether our maxim is one we can expect all rational agents to adopt in relatively similar circumstances. Using this Kantian system, the intentions of modern day artists like David Blaine and Damien Hurst were closely examined. I stated that it was the intention of Damien Hurst to shock his audience rather than to please. Consequently, Hurst’s works like the ‘shark’ was viewed as aesthetically poor but led to fame and fortune due to him gaining recognition by the public eye. However, is unlike Caravaggio (from the Baroque era) who had similar intentions in depicting truth within reality and whose skill and technique is certainly not limited. The key difference between the two artists (Caravaggio and Hirst) is not the obvious answer of ‘time’. Instead, it is how Hirst seems to have a good sense of the media and understands how that mindset works, which results in his intention being primarily concerned with a self-interested end. I argued that due to the influence of time and the drastic changes in fashion and philosophical thinking that have taken place since the early 15th century, it is time that dictates what art is considered acceptable and where art is going. The shock value of some artists today has lead to skill being undermined because they are reacting to a demand from society. Consequently, I believe that art can be anything, but that it has become a response to commodification and the need to make money as opposed to conveying personal expression. I feel that Kant’s philosophy of morality is key to my argument because it deals with the reasoning of the validity of art and the intentions of artists in order to determine whether their motivation is pure.