Philosophy in English...different books...

Page 4 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 24 Nov - 9:05

Hi!For this week,I’ll remember you of what had said Machiavel about the 2 things which can turn out any government or king. First,the dishonor of his women and second,the lost of his patrimony. On that I’ll pursue with my book of sociology. In these times where the patrimony of canada is threatened I know then not many people read me... But they maybe should or shouldn’t depending on which interests you see it. In my personal life,it’s the better time of my life sincerely. I’m solitary and my life could seems to be boring for some but for me it’s a heaven! After so many years of wars and battles of all kinds I appreciate my home alone and not with any kind of people.I’m happy with my cat and we live pretty much good. I don’t have money but I don’t have debts and my life isn’t very costly.
In my Blackwell’s companion of sociology...
This “downwards” systemic shaping of agency was the second element of his patrimony. This heritage was foundational for the central value system within normative functionalism,as an a prioristic guarantor of agential integration through socialization. As Parsons declares, “cultural elements are elements of a paterned order which mediate and regulate communication and other aspects of the mutuality of orientations in inter-actional processes. This brief formulation contains the leitmotif of systemic (C.S.) coherence, now elevated to a matter of functional necessity, and the downwards inflection,namely that central values shape social,that’s S-C, integration,with the net result being the harmoniously functioning society. If Parsons gave pride of place to an overtly coherent C.S.,linguistic structuralism did the reverse. Lévi-Strauss (1968) accepted superficial systemic incoherence,but maintained that these manifestations could be deciphered as transformations upon an underlying code. Fundamentally, cultural systems could be decoded because ontologically the C.S. was a code,and therefore internally coherent. As is generic to downwards conflation,cultural agents were subornated, being fully encased by the systemic mythology,which prevented an S-C exploitation of surface inconsistencies in it. Epiphenomena cannot act back to affect that which forms them. Hence,the S-C level was never deemed capable of introducing novel interpretations,transformative of the C.S. code.


Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 1 Dec - 9:11

Hi!Trudeau had made some crazy stuff again this week with Cuba,what the hell with him...Since the beginning of this country,Canada has always been a great leader in human rights and freedom for his people,but now,This freedom is threatened and the human rights are in second place in his priorities...
Import third world countries,becomes a third world country. And with him,it’s the meaning of it.
Except for this asshole it’s a very good time,this year in facts,has been the best of my life... I’m worried a little about the future in this country. But,in the worst case,it will be a civil war, with the compact immigration of the UN... a very bad idea in my opinion... And if you follow me on facebook,I read a lot about it and many think that too. It will be a civil war,the first in canada since the FLQ which wasn’t a real civil war too but close.
Neo-Marxists take as fundamental precisely that which the downward conflationists had sedulously neglected,namely the role of power in the imposition of culture. What differentiates between the 2 types of conflation isn’t the end product,which in both cases reinforces the myth of systemic cultural integration,but how it’s produced,for here we are dealing with a manipulated consensus. Consequently,conflation is from the bottom upwards,since it’s socio-cultural conflict that generates the coherent C.S.,through the basic process of ideological imposition. For Western Marxists,it’s not merely that social relations produce systemic cultural integration,but also that capitalism as a whole can only now collapse from cultural undermining.Hence both cohesion and change at the S-C level. Beyond this, the 2 versions of Neo-Marxism most prominently associated with upwards conflation describe the causal process responsible for it very differently. On the one hand,proponents of the “dominant” ideology thesis emphasize that ideological uniformity is accomplished by one class doing something to another, namely direct manipulation. To Miliband,for example,an ideological acceptance of the capitalist order is deliberately fostened by massive indoctrination,while in similar vein,Marcuse argues that one-dimensional thought is systematically promoted by the makers of politics and their purveyors of mass information.

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 8 Dec - 11:06

Hi everyone! It has been a good week again for me. Time is much more quicker then before I don’t know if it’s the Mandela effect but it seems this way. I’m woried about the future in this country but I pray for my time being to be ok... But the Canada of the next generation is darker everyday with Trudeau... UN compact immigration is a disaster coming here and we’ll have to wait until the next election before beginning to feel more safer. In Toronto,ISIS claiming different threats over Christmas. And after that,they call “islamophobia”!ah! I’d begun a book on International Law...I’ll talk about this in a few weeks.
Again in my Blackwell Companion of sociology...
As Abercrombie,Hill,and Turner summarize the case,”through its control of ideological production,the dominant class is able to supervise the construction of a set of coherent beliefs. This contains 2 dubious assumptions:that the class has a consistent set of material interests,these will necessarily be given coherent ideational expres​sion(which Marx himself ridiculed in relation to liberalism).
On the other hand,The Frankfurt School doesn’t rely upon the indoctrination of one group by another, but rather on how the expanding pursuit of technical control in advanced industrial societies results in distorted communication for the whole human race. Material interest is still the motor,but the interest in technical control is no longer narrowly confined to a “ruling class”,and the instrument for the diffusion of its ideas is no longer indoctrination but the colonization of the lifeworld by the empirical-analytical sciences,producing a “technocratic consciousness”. When we think of ourselves and our social relations in these objectified terms,moral debate becomes inert and social critique moribund. Nevertheless,interest remains the source of S-C domination,which is then upwardly reproduced at the C.S. level as “knowledge”. Moreover,the consistency of the C.S. is greater than ever before because it’s grounded in a network of scientific propositions that work, in their own domain. Consequently, to Habermas, “Technocratic consciousness is... less ideological than all previous ideologies. For it doesn’t have the opaque force of a delusion... It’s less vulnerable to reflection,because it’s no longer only ideology.”

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 15 Dec - 8:17

Hi! This week has been good for me again,it’s the better years of my life sincerely. One friend of mine is dying of cancer which is the only depressing part. But it’s okay. She haves 6 months ahead of her and I see her when I can. For me,life is good now. A new year is beginning soon I wish you the best for 2019. Time is going pass so quickly these days. For this week,again in conflation in sociology...
Central conflation: This position results from a critique of the previous versions. When culture is held to work surreptitiously “behind the back” of every agent (downwards version),this omits the necessary role of human agency in constituting and reconstituting culture; when culture is seen as merely the imposition of one group’s worldview upon others (upward version), what is omitted is the necessity of culture as the medium of any action at all, a fact that would have to be faced were domination and manipulation ever overcome. Nevertheless,an element is rescued from each of the earlier versions and recombined. From downwards conflation what is salvaged is the Cultural system as a semiotic order, supplying a corpus of meanings that are necessarily drawn upon in the production of each act. From upwards conflation what is rescued and “democratisized” is the continuous and indispensable contribution of S-C; all social agents are held to know a great deal about the production and reproduction of their society, which thus depends upon the skilled performances of each of its members. Central conflation is a position from which the C.S. level and the S-C levels are held to be mutually constitutive.Now it’s quite possible to endorse the “centrism” of this approach,accepting that human agents shape culture,but are themselves culturally molded,without eliding the 2 levels. Indeed this is the stance adopted in the rest of the chapter. However,central conflation does elide the 2 because they are regarded as 2 faces of an inseparable “duality”. The conceptualization of their mutual constitution as a simultaneous process means that there’s no way of untying the constitutive elements. The properties od the C.S. and the S-C may be different, but non is acknowledged to have the temporal priority and relative autonomy vis-à-vis the other that would grant it independent causal efficacy.

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 22 Dec - 8:11

Merry Christmas everyone! It’s a beautiful one’s for me this year and I’m happy. For this week,it’s again the continuity of my sociology’s book. It can be useful to understand with this badass as Trudeau as our PM... I’m reading a book now about International Law,I’ll come back with it soon when I’ll be more advanced in the subject.
The intimacy of their interconnection denies this and hence it’s impossible to examine their interplay.
The resulting difficulty is that central conflation precludes any theoretical specification of the conditions conductive to cultural reproduction versus cultural transformation. On the contrary, the “duality of culture”, itself oscillates between endorsing 1) the hyperactivity of agency, the corollary of which is the intrinsic volatility of the C.S.,2) the remarkable coherence of ordering rules,associated instead with the essential recursiveness and routinization of S-C life.
In structuration theor,agential (S-C) hyperactivity is an ineluctable consequence of all systemic (C.S.) rules being defined as transformative thus enabling “people’s” interpretations to transfigure the “parts” of the system,namely rules themselves. However, if “all social rules are transformational”, it follows that agents enjoy very high degrees of freedom,at any time they could have acted otherwise,intervening for change or for maintenance of the cultural status quo. Hence the counterfactual image of agential hyperactivity,in which these generous degrees of freedom are explored and exploited at the S-C level. Hence too, the C.S. becomes highly volatile if “change,or its potentiality is thus inherent in all moments of social reproduction.”
The other face of the “duality of culture” is intended to rectify the previous image, but overcorrects by generating a counter image of “chronic recursiveness.” Basically, agents have to draw upon rules in order to act and these are thus reconstituted through interaction.

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 29 Dec - 9:02

Hi everyone! What a tragedy with Trudeau again... I hope all Canada will understand the danger he constitutes. For my part I wish you an happy nre year for 2019,for my part, it’s great... It’s sincerely the better years of my life,where I have a home,a real one’s just for me. I’m poor but it’s not much of a problem now. For this week,I’m talking about cultural integration and politically correctness,which of Trudeau favorite’s subject.
Thus the myth of cultural integration resurfaces,for it is more than dubious that the rules regulating social practices have the same mutually implicative nature as syntax. However, in this way, structuration theory is committed to the total and totalizing coherence of the C.S. such that agents inescapable use of it embroils them in its stable reproduction. The pendulum swings so far the other way that we are now presented with another overintegrated view of “man”, for the “duality of culture” ineluctably entwines the smallest item of day-to-day behavior with systemic attributes,thus generating routinized patterns of action.
Taken together,the 2 faces of the “duality of culture” can reveal nothing about the conditions that explain when cultural transformation rather than cultural reproduction will or does occur. Because both are possible at every moment,then central conflation provides no purchase upon the processes that account for cultural dynamics. Structuration theory tells us that both structure and agency are inextribably involved,but because they are inseparable in their mutual constitution,the interplay of their properties and powers cannot be disentangled to supply an explanatory account of why cultural matters are so rather than otherwise.

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 5 Jan - 8:10

Happy New Year everyone! I’d a very nice dinner with a family I know since a long time ago... I feel good in it and they’re good with me. Most of the time,I read and write a lot and taking care of myself and my home. I hope Trudeau will go very soon, because much more he stays there, worst is the situation. If not,it will be because whe’re in a dictatorship similar those in Africa. And it’s vey bad news for the children of today. I check on fukushima in Japan and the situation there. It’s very important and none of the known big media, except RT News, is talking about it.
In my Companion on sociology’s book,for this week:
The Nonconflationary Approach to Culture:On analytical dualism:
In contradistinction to every version of conflation is the social realist approach advanced here,which is based 4-square upon analytical dualism.This is quite distinct from philosophical dualism,for it’s not suggested that separate entities are involved. Realists regard structural properties as emergent from activity-dependent upon agency,whilst structural powers only exercise causal efficacy by working through agency. Therefore,it’s only analytically separable components that are made in a realist theory of culture. Specifically the C.S. is conceptualized as emergent from S-C interaction and is only operative through it. The 2 are distinguished by virtue of their different and irreducible properties and powers. This distinction is justified as follows and turns out to be familiarly quotidian. In developing a conceptual framework for employing analytical dualism in cultural analysis,culture as a whole is defined as referring to all intelligibilia,that’s to any item that has the dispositional ability to be understood by someone,whether or not anyone does so at a given time. Within this corpus,the C.S. is that subset of items to which the law of contradiction can be applied (society’s propositional register at any given time). Contradictions and complementarities are logical properties of the world of ideas,world of three as Popper (1972) terms it,or,if preferred of the contents of libraries.

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty oops!I forgot...

Post  Admin on Mon 14 Jan - 7:15

Hi everyone! This week has been very busy for me. For this week,it will be about the encounter of different cultures put together and what can happen...
At any moments,the C.S. is the product of historical S-C interaction,but having emerged (culturalemergence being a continuous process) then qua product,it has properties but also powers of its own kind. Like structure,some of its most important causal powers are those of constraints and enablements. In the cultural domain these stem from contradictions and complementarities.However,again like structure,constraints require something to constrain,and enablements something to enable. Those “somethings” are the ideational projects of people,the beliefs they seek to uphold, the theories they wish to vindicate, the propositions they want to be able to deem true. In other words, the exercise of C.S. causal powers is dependent upon their activation from the S.C. level. What ideas are entertained socio-culturally,at any given time,result from the properties and powers belonging to that level. Obviously, we social agents don’t live by propositions alone; we generate myths, are moved by mysteries,become rich in symbols,and ruthless at manipulating hidden persuaders.

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 19 Jan - 9:18

Sorry for last week,I’d forgotten my article! For this one’s, it will continue in the same way... Soon enough,I’ll begin with international law,but for now, in sociology...
These elements are precisely matters of interpersonal influence from hermeneutic understanding,at one extreme, to ideological assault and battery,at the other. It’s interaction at the S-C level that explains why particular groups wish to uphold a particular idea,or to undermine one held by another group. Once they do, then their ideational projects will confront C.S. properties (that were not of their own making) and unleash these systemic powers upon themselves which they may seek to realize or to contain.However, the S-C level possesses causal powers of its own kind in relation to the C.S.; it can resolve apparent contradictions and respond adaptively to real ones,or explore and exploit the complementarities it confronts,thus modifying the cultural system in the process. It can set its own cultural agenda,often in relation to its structurally based interests,by creatively adding new items to the systemic register. In these ways,the S-C level is reponsible for elaborating upon the composition of the C.S. level.
...
Although substantively far removed, the “constraining contradiction” also confronts any explanatory theory A, which is advanced in science, but whose observational theory B doesn’t provide immediate empirical corroboration,that’s if scientists think they have good reason not to jettison A. What the “constraining contradiction” does in practice is to confront those committed to A, who also have no option but to live with B as well, with a particular situational logic. According to this logic given their continuing dedication to A (its abandonment is always possible because conditioning is never determinism),thenthey are constrained to deal with B in a specific manner. Since A and B aare logically inconsistent,then no genuine resolution is possible between them, but if B remains unaltered,it threatens the credibility or tenability of A. Consequently,the situational logic directs that continued adherence to A entails making a correction of its relationship with B mandatory. Corrective action involves addressing the contradiction and seeking to repair it by reinterpretation of the ideas involved. The generic result will be some form of syncretism that brings about union between the antithetical but indispensable sets of ideas. Obviously, for protagonists of A,their interest is in concentrating upon syncretic reinterpretations of B,in order to make it compatible.
If you understand this,it’s the problem facing Canada with Islam.

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 26 Jan - 9:36

Hi everyone! Again for this week, I’ll continue on sociology’s topic for the purpose to understand what’s happening now in our country. And the consequences which can mean. The sociology of Canada is at a turning point these last years and we need to understand this process to see forward.
The more complex the internal structure of such a corpus of ideas becomes, the more diffucult it’s to assimilate new items, without major disruption to the delicately articulated interconnections. Tight and sophisticated linkages eventually repel innovation because of its disruptive capacity. This is the result of the situational logic of protection. Its implications within the conspectus is that it progressively accomodates fewer and fewer radical innovations until, in Kuhn’s words,it “suppresses fundamental novelties because they are fundamentally subversive of its basic commitments”. Weber,of course,made the same point about the effects of complex ritualization in Hinduism being incapable of the innovative “germinationof capitalism in its midst”. The implications for relations between the conspectus and its external environment is protective insulation against disruptive incursions,the most notable example being the Chinese Edict of Seclusion. The situational logic of protection means brooking no rivals from outside and repressing rivalry inside. The former is at the mercy of “international relations”; the latter depends upon the success of its main socio-cultural thrust towards cultural reproduction in the (relevant) population. Ultimately,whether or not this sticks and endures turns upon cui bono; nonneneficiaries have no interest in sustaining protection.
The whole point of distinguishing between the cultural system and the socio-cultural levels is because the orderly or conflictual relationships characteristic of the one can vary independently of the other, which is crucial to the explanation of stability or change.

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 2 Feb - 8:43

Hi! This winter is very cold this year,but I’m fine. I’m really happy where I am,my home. About Trudeau and multiculturalism again for this week...
If conditional influences were determinants,cultural stability would ensue in both cases. Yet this isn’t invariably the case. An economical way to explain why not is to ask what properties and powers may be possessed by agency and exercised during S-C such that the outcome is contrary to the conditioning. In other words,what accounts for discrepancies between the orderliness (or disorderliness) of the 2 levels? Firstly,why can social integration persist despite the existence of tensions within society’s system of ideas? Secondly,what explains a syncretic set of ideas failing to take hold in society or a systematized conspectus failing to be reproduced?
The answer to the first question (the persistence of disproportionately high S-C integration), seems to lie in the effective exercise of cultural power.Where upholders of A have the position and the resources to control the diffusion of information,they can practice a variety of “containment strategies” designed to insulate the majority of the population from dangerous familiarity with B. In this context, Lukes’s (1974) 3-dimensional concept of power seems readily transferable to cultural domain. Power is used to control the social visibility of contradictions and thus to prevent the eruption of S-C controversy. Its applications can vary from the straightforward first-dimensional use of censorship to the more subtle theird-dimensional strategies that induce “misrecognition of symbolic violence”, perceotively analyzed by Bourdieu (1964),although always presumed by him to be lastingly successful. However,”containmentstrategies” are seen here as strictly temporizing maneuvers,most effective against the least influential. Nevertheless, whilst a week may be a long time in science, exercises of cultural power can buy centuries of quietude in the history of a civilization, especially when ideal interests and the structural distribution of resources are closely superimposed.

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 9 Feb - 8:16

It’s a really nice period for me and I’m happy! What worries me is in the political domain in federal government specifically. Liberal are in my point of view dangerous for Canada.
Why?...
One answer to the second question (unexpectedly low S-C integration), which seems correct,is that independent socio-cultural discrepancies in orderlinss occur when the social (or sectional) distribution of material interests doesn’t get with the situational logic of the C.S. (or subsystem) at any given time.Important as this is, if that were the end of the matter it would amount to saying, “cultural conditioning works ceteris paribus unless structural conditioning contravenes it.” It would be to retreat from advancing a theory of cultural dynamics because only countervailing material interests (and their promotive organizations) would constitute the properties and powers capable of resisting cultural conditioning. Instead,2 scenarios will be sketched,which give ideal interests their due,thus advancing a theory of cultural dynamics,without collapsing into it.
On the “corrective” scenario,associated with necessary ad internal C.S. contradictions,the unificatory thrust of the situational logic can be deflected in 3 ways. Cumulatively they spell a growing disorderliness in the cultural relations between people that may ultimately precipitate a corresponding clash in the realm of ideas. Firstly,there’s progressive desertion.At the socio-cultural level no one is compelled to take part in a syncretic enterpris

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 16 Feb - 8:29

Hi everyone! So much snow these days, it’s hard to walk outside and I don’t see through my windows. It has been a good week for me in all and for the weather,it will pass soon.
Cultural Elaboration:Although the above scenarios have been presented as ones that may unreel autonomously within the cultural realm, there is no denying that in reality they are usually accelerated and decelerated by their interaction with structural factors. What is of particular importance is how far structure differentiates material interest groups that reinforce or cross-cut the socio-cultural alignments conditioned by the C.S. The interplay between culture and structure is even more marked when we turn,in conclusion,to the ways in which cultural elaboration can be independently introduced from the Socio-Cultural level. However, although such social conflict may well be fueled by structural cleavages and divisions, reither the form of cultural interaction involved nor the type of cultural changes induced can be reduced to epiphenomena of structure. This is because there’s considerable cultural work to be done by agents when the ideas with which they are dealing are only contingently rather than necessarily related,for here, agency alone is responsible for bringing these ideas into conjunction and achieving social salience for them. It’s also because once they have done so,they have created 2 new forms of situational logic in which the promotion of their own ideal interests are then enmeshed. In contrast to the “constraining contradiction”, where the alternative to a given set of ideas is also internally related to them,and thus constantly threatens them with its own counter-actualization,here the accentuation of a contingent contradiction is a supremely social matter. Accentuation depends upon groups,actuated by interests,making a contradiction competitive,by taking sides over it and by trying to make other people take their side.

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 23 Feb - 8:46

It has been a good week for me again! I live an happy life now and I don’t regret anything,it was worth it!
In sociology’s companion again...
In brief,opposed interest groups cause the “competitive contradiction” to impringe on broader sections of the (relevant) population;it doesn’t ineluctably confront them, as is the case with constraining contradictions,the moment that anyone asserts A. Perhaps the best and most important illustration of the “ competitive contradiction” is ideological conflict. Were ideologies no more than passive reflections of material interests,then it would be impossible that they could advance,foster,or defend such interests. In the process,their ideational conflict becomes subject to its own distinctive situational logic. In contradistinction to the “constraining contradiction”, here the situational logic fosters elimination, not correction. In the former case, agents were driver to cope with ideas that necessarily contradicted their own (compromising,conciliating,and conceding much en route),whereas those involved and drawn into involvement) over a “competitive contradiction” have every incentive to eliminate the opposition. Because partisans of ideas A and B are unconstrained by any internal and necessary relations between these ideologies,there’s nothing to restrain their combativeness,for they have everything to gain from inflicting maximum damage on one another’s ideas in the course of competition.
In principle,victory consists in so damaging and discrediting oppositional views that they lose all salience in society leaving their antithesis in unchallenged supremacy.
In practice,the cut and thrust between them has the entirely unintended consequence that far from one ideology being eliminated,both contribute to one another’s refinement. Charge isn’t merely met by counter-charge, but also by self-clarification and response (as is equally the case for competing scientific frameworks). Ironically,both sets of ideas undergo “progressive problem-shifts”, thus inserting much greater pluralism into the C.S. Correspondingly,since both groups of protagonists seek to win over uncommitted agents,the effect of their refined interchanges is socio-culturally to increase cleavage within the population.

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 2 Mar - 8:23

For this week’it will be about the difference between cultural variety and cultural diversity.
This is the exact obverse of the negative feedback mechanism that regulates the protection and reproduction of the necessary complementarity.Not only are the logics of the 2 kinds of complementarities the inverse of one another,but so are their results. Cultural variety is the opposite of cultural density. Variety feeds on what looks promising but is ill-defined; density deals with what feel like certainties, but are already overdefined. Variety pushes on the extend cultural horizons unpredictably;density stays at home to embellish the cultural environment systematically. These differences are equally marked in their socio-cultural effects,specialization prompts ideational diversification; systematization fosters cultural reproduction. The proliferation of specialist groupings is fissiparous in its social effects,for as more and more sectional groups are carved out,they have less and less in common with one another and with the rest of society. Sectional groups,unlike polarized ones, aren’t defined by their opposition to others, but by their differences from everyone. The dialectics of specialization and sectionalism contribute to the progressive exclusion of vast tracts of the population from larger and larger portions of specialized knowledge. The division of the population into laypeople and experts is repeated over and over again as each new specialism emerges. This is a horizontal form of socio-cultural differentiation,quite unlike the vertical stratification engendered by the necessary complementarity.
By distinguishing between the C.S. and the socio-cultural levels and examining their interplay, the myth of “culture as a community of shared meanings” has been challenged on 2 fronts. On the one hand, 4 different components,constitutive of “meanings” (C.S.) have been differentiated, bodies of ideas which are syncretic, pluralist, systematized and specialized in pluralist,systematized and specialized in their conditional effects upon the further development of ideas.

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 9 Mar - 8:02

It has been a good week for me again! In sociology again this week,almost done about it!It’s the 14th anniversary of my departure of Bellechasse (in 2 days officially),it’s a beautiful day to me now! Times has changed a lot since but I don’t consider it a uniquely bad time in my life now,it was a big change yes but for the better and I’m happy today, It costed me a big sacrifice but it was worth it!
In reading I advise strongly for you to read The people vs Mohammad a very good book then I’m reading right now and the similarity between the prophet of Islam and Rosaire is astonishing! I recommend you to read it if you want a better understanding of what I say.
What Essentialism we have is limited to lower order biological functions,we breath, eat,and obey low level stimulus-response processes,but all higher level cognitive and agentic functions derive from societal and cultural participation. In social thought the modern origin of this thesis can be traced to Mead and Durkheim. At about the sometime as the American philosopher George Herbert Mead (1934) was thinking about the external origin of mental structures the French sociologist Emile Durkheim was having similar thoughts about cognitive complexity and mental classifactory structure. He also thought these were not innate,but forms of group structure internalized into the mind to provide cognitive complexity. Reflecting, perhaps, differences in their broader intellectual climates, Mead, embedded in a more individualistic American intellectual tradition, rooted the origin of mental structures (self,language, and even mind itself) in the flux of micro patterns of social interaction, whereas Durkheim, embedded in more collectivist European traditions,rooted his (collective sentiments, moral commitments), in the more macro external realities of society itself. Years later, Pierre Bourdieu (1979) would restore Durkheim’s culture-cognition fusion hypothesis calling internalized collective sentiments and moral order a “habitus”.This logic seems so air tight: if to say biology is to say “automatic response” then to say biology is to say fixed,is to say we don’t /cannot get agentic flexibility from biology. But biology,hence Essentialism,isn’t only fixed response, for brain is biology,and brain is mind,and mind is language,and language is the infinite use of finite means, and that,infinite use,is unfixedness. And when language is the primary means of symbolic social interaction, then that flexibility has an Essentialist origin. Most sociologists,though,think Chmsky on language is about innatism,which is mistakenly equated with fixed outcomes;but it is just the opposite. It’s determined indeterminism. It’s fixed cognitive mechanisms, such as the mind’s language faculty which provides by its very nature,creativity and freedom in language use,and hence in symbolic interaction, the capacity to play roles,and the ability to enact social identities.

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 16 Mar - 9:37

Hi everyone! For this week in continuity with the last,I’ll talk about sociology and diversity and its implications on a country.
There is a circularity to this internalization logic that reaches its contemporary zenith in Bourdieu’s notion of socially patterned habits,where he argues, “the habitus is necessity internalized and converted into a disposition that generates meaningful practices and perceptions”. Bourdieu (1979) acknowledges the importance of Chomsky’s idea of generative grammar and applies the concept of the culture/cognition interface,arguin, “the habitus is both the generative principle of objectively classifiable judgments and the system of classification of these practices”, which is virtually Chomsky’s characterization of the mind’s Language Faculty that both produces structured linguistic output and parses incoming sound to create linguistic meaning. But the mind’s Language Faculty isn’t “the product of the internalization of the division into social classes”, for it’s not an external cultural template; it’s not a class,group, or society specific cultural structure than can be imported to render socially specified judgments.What is the generative mechanism is the mind/brain; not the structures it produces. When Bourdieu argues that habituses include, “systems of dispositions...such as a linguistic competence and a cultural competence” he’s engaging in a double error,for linguistic competence isn’t “installed” or “internalized” from the outside,it is one of the mind/brain’s modules,and culture isn’t generative. It’s the output of a generative process. But Bourdieu attempts to animate these external static cultural forms as having a generative property and conceives of learned habits as somehow generative,which they aren’t. Habits simply aren’t generative,nor can generativity be transferred to cultural internalizations yielding,somehow,generative socially patterned habits,what he calls habituses. This problem,though, is much more general than Bourdieu. It’s sociology’s problem,as from Durkheim to the present we continue to take products of the mind and theorize them as the origins of the mind. (Mead is perhaps the classic case, arguing mind arises out of social interaction).

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 23 Mar - 9:06

Hi! For political and sociological comprehension of what’s happening in Canada now...
Radical Essentialism:
The most difficult idea for sociologists to understand,therefore,is the Chomskyan insight that we truly open (capable of learning everything/anything),we wouldn’t be as agentically free as we are with our very specific cognitive hard wiring. But remember:it’s not outcomes that are hard wired;it’s indeterminacy in the form of the mind/brain’s capacity to function as a discrete combinational system,which results in linguistic open endedness,which in turn results in the flexibility of symbolic interaction,and therefore the capacity to occupy an infinite number of social roles,interact in an infinite number of social situations,and cognitively manage, in principle,an infinite number of social selves and cultural identities. If such flexibility is rooted in biology (brain/mind mechanisms) we need to retheorize the philosophical concept of Essentialism,for in reality it provides much of what we know as human flexibility,choice,freedom,and free will. Such a new Radical Essentialism,by reasoned implication,means that the insights of Postmodern theory into the multiplicity of selves,fractured selves,socially constructed selves,contingent meanings, and infinitely regressing selves as signifiers,are predicated upon very specific assumptions about an Essentialist architecture of Mind. While innatist assumptions seem the opposite of postmodern indeterminacy,the truth is they are required to realize the postmodern theoretical project. What seems the furthest from innatism (externalist postmodern social constructionism) is,in fact, the most dependent upon internalist mental mechanisms (Essentialism),which are absolutely necessary to realize the high degree of human flexibility claimed by Postmodern theory. This leads to the postmodern irony: social contructionism is dependent upon Essentialism.Actually,there can be no constructionism without essentialism. In this regard the interesting thing about Chomsky is that while he is a radical on political issues,his theory of human nature, based on his theory of language/mind,is also quite radical,for he spells out how the mind,through language,generates indeterminacy,creativity,and freedom,and if indeterminate enough,generates the prime postmodern assumption about the unfixed nature of human action.

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 30 Mar - 8:45

For now,I’ll write about International law which is interesting,it’s not applied justly in this world but the idea is good somehow and very instructive. My life is relax now and I like it,therefore I’ll write about what’s interesting to learn. I love my new life very much!
Ethical Bases:While international law now looks to history as one of its most important bases,it must nevertheless accord somewhat closely with the ethical standards of the time and will tend to approximate to them. The growth of the body of law upon slavery has rested on both ethical and historical bases. International law is principally an output of civilized nations having certain ethical standards. Such ancient practices as the giving of histages for the fullfillment of treaty stipulations have disappeared,and ethical bases are generally recognized in determining practice. While these ethical bases should be recognized,international law cannot be deduced from the subtle reasoning upon the abstract ideas of what it ought to be.Modern international law treats mainly of what is, but what is in international relations is always conditioned by a recognition of what ought to be.
Jural Bases:The nature of modern international law is in part due to the jural bases upon which it rests.
The Roman Law:was the most potent influence in determining the early development,particularly in respect to dominion and acquisition of territory. International law gained a certain dignity and weight from its relation to the Roman law, the most potent legal institution in history.
The Canon Law: as the law of ecclesiastics who were supposed to recognize the broadest principles of human unity,gave an ethical element to early international law. Gregory IX (1227-1241),the Justinian of the Church,reduced canon law to a code. The abstract reasoning upon its principles among the clergy and counsellors of kings, made it strongly influenced state practice. The canon law gave a quasi-religious sanction to its observance, and in so far as international law embodied its principles, gave the same sanction to the observance of international equity. This may be seen in the religious formula in treaties, even to a late date.

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 6 Apr - 10:01

I’m studying Internationa law and for some weeks my writings will be about it. It’s very interesting to know about it during these times where it’s cited all around specifically about the middle-east,north korea and venezuela...
Statute law proceeds from legislative enactment, and is enforced by the power of the enacting state within its jurisdiction. International law, on the other hand,isn’t formally enacted,and has no tribunal for its enforcement.Resort may be had to war in case of infraction of its rules,but the issue may rather depend upon the relative powers of the 2 states and not upon the justice of the cause.
If law is defined,as by Austin, “A rule laid down for the guidance of an intelligent being having power over him”, it would not be possible to include under it international law and undue liberality in the interpretation of the language.
In form,however, law is a body of rules and principles in accord with which phenomena take place.
If these rules aren’t followed as enunciated by the state in case of statute law,certain penalties are inflicted. The nature of the penalty must to a great extent depend on the source. International law is the body of rules and principles, in accord with which,interstate phenomena take place.Violations of international law don’t meet the same penalties as those of statute law, as they don’t have the same source nor an established tribunal for their enforcement. International law is, however,in form law and in practice so regarded.

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 13 Apr - 8:47

For this week,I’ll continue with the book about International Law and its functioning. I recommend for you some books... The origin of the Jews by Steven Weitzman and People vs Muhammad Psychological Analysis by J.K. Sheindlin. The last one is about the psychological analysis of the prophet of islam,it’s very interesting to read but I don’t think is available in French,the same for the forst, a mystery I would like to know.
If for a time international intercourse follows certain methods,these methods are regarded as binding in later intercourse,and departure from this procedure is held a violation of international right. That collection of customs known as “The law Merchant” is an example of a source of this class. Of this it has been said “Gradually,the usages of merchants hardened into a cosmopolitan law,often at positive variance with the principles of local law, but none the less acquiesced in for mercantile transactions, and eminence and world-wide reputation,such as the courts of the Hanseatic League and the Parloir aux Bourgeois at Paris.
...
The decisions of domestic courts upon such matters as extradition,diplomatic privileges, piracy,etc,tend to become a source of international law. In the U.S. the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction “in all cases affecting ambassadors,other public ministers,and consuls”.
The decisions of courts of arbitration and other mixed courts are usually upon broad principles. Some of the principles involved may become established precedents,yet the tendency to render a decision,which by a compromise may be measurably acceptable to both parties,may lesser the value of the decision as a precedent. As arbitration is of necessity voluntary, there is generally a consensus upon certain points,even though the decision rendered may not become a precedent. The growth of the practice of arbitration of disputes is an indication of the general recognition of mutual confidence between states. The principles upon which the court of arbitration bases its decision,rather than the decision itself,furnish material valuable for international law.

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 20 Apr - 8:40

Hi everyone! For this week I’ll talk about diplomatic affairs and the rules around it. It’s my lectures these times except for some like new Pendergast stories and the books I mentioned in te previous article.
The diplomatic papers,are distinct from the state papers to which more than one state becomes a party,are simply papers issued by a state for the guidance of its own representatives in international intercourse. The papers are sometimes named state papers or included among the papers to which other states are parties,in the U.S.,in the series known as “Diplomatic Correspondence,1861-1868”,and “Foreign Relations” since 1870; and in Great Britain in the “British and Foreign State Papers”.
These papers,showing the opinions of various states from time to time upon certain subjects which may not come up for formal state action,afford a valuable source of information upon the attitude of states toward questions still formally unsettled. The simple expression to state agents in the way of instructions or information as to the position of the state on a given matter may, if continued and long accepted,give to the principle involved the force of international saction. This was almost the case in the so-called Monroe Doctrine. In these papers may often be found an indication of the line which the principles of international law will subsequently follow and a general consensus by several states in diplomatic instructions may be considered strong evidence of what the law is on a given point.
A state is a sovereign political unity. It’s of the relations os states that public international law mainly treats. From the nature of its subject-matter it is a juridical,historical, and philosophical science. These sovereign political unities may vary greatly. The unity however
a)Must be political,organised for public ends as understood in the family of nations and not for private ends as in the case of a commercial company,a band of pirates,or a religious organization.
b)Must possess sovereignty,supreme political power beyond and above which there is no political power. It’s not inconsistent with sovereignty that a state should voluntarily take upon itself obligations to other states, even though the obligations be assumed even though the obligations be assumed under stress of war,or fear of evil.

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 27 Apr - 9:44

Hi! It has been a good week for me. On another subject, I find very dangerous the philosophy of Trudeau about sexual identity... If you look at facebook you’ll see than future generations are in big trouble in this sense.
To continue in my book about international law,it’s interesting to see the exchanges between states and to learn about diplomacy and other things about it.
From the nature of the state as a sovereign political unity it must be self-sufficient,and certain conditions are therefore generally recognised as necessary for its existence from the standpoint of international law.
In order that a state may be regarded as within the “family of nations”, and within the pale of international law, it must recognize the rights of other states and acquiesce in its obligations toward them. This is considered a moral condition of state existence.
A state must also possess those physical resources which enable it to exist as territory.
A state must possess a body of men so related as to warrant the belief in the continued existence of the unity.
Each state may be its own judge as to the time when these relations are established in a given body of men,and the recognition of a new state is fitting. That such conditions are recognized as prerequisites of state existence from the point of view of international law isn’t due to the essential nature of the state, but rather to the course of development of international law;as Hall says,”The degree to which the doctrine of international law are based upon the possession of land must in the main be attributed to the association of rights of sovereignty or supreme control over human beings with that of territorial property in the minds of jurists at the period when the foundations of international law were being laid”.
The external relationship of the state rather than the internal nature is the subject of consideration in international law. For local law a community may enter upon state existence long before this existence is recognized by other nations,as in the case of Switzerland before 1648.Until recognition by other states of its existence becomes general,a new state cannot acquire full status in international law; and this recognition is conditioned by the policy of the recognizing states.

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 4 May - 9:19

Hi everyone,summer arrives soon,I hope it will be less suffocating than last year but I’m happy to see the grass again!
I’ll continue on my book of International Law for this week,but before I’m sorry for the little girl in Estrie who had died with her father and stepmother,and its stange again to know that many people knew about it and did nothing. I’m no so much surprised about this fact. When she fled her home during the night to find some food in garbage,a neighbor a brought her to her dad’s home but not called the DPJ... Yes maybe the system,again,misjudged the situation,it happens very often,they don’t know the real situation and they judge on what they think... But often,what they think isn’t what it is in reality. But for the neighbor who found the little girl during the night when she tried to find some food in the garbages,if she was a little sense of deduction she wouldn’t have brought the girl to her dad. And for the stepmother,it’s not very surprising for her...Rarely,the step moter or father will love her or his step child... The woman became jealous and the man became attacted fy the child anormally,I’d seen that in some situations before,in my family first. Some had compared her to Aurore,it’s true for the similarity with the stepmother again. When you judge a case like this one’s you need to understand all the situation not just one side and you have to know why this problem is there. IT’s why I think they misjudged the situation because they didn’t understand the whole situation and the whole problem. I listened to the uncle,grandmother and mother of the child. The mother was in serious distress during the pregnancy,but that they didn’t take it into account in their judgment. The father was violent with the mother long before the birth of the child (based on the saying of the uncle). If you don’t understand the distress of the mother you cannot understand the distress of the child. And for the father, I believe the stepmother had her role on all this because she didn’t love the child. And she didn’t wanted of her in the house. On what I listened of the family around the child, it’s my understanding. And for the mother, she was in distress,yes,but they just didn’t understand why and what was the problem in the family. In my opinion,it was just a toxic climate between the 2 parents.
And now, in my International Law...
Treaties and state papers of whatever form indicate the state of opinion,at a given time,in regard to the matters of which they speak. Since they are binding upon the parties to them,treaties may be regarded as evidence of what the states, bound by their terms,accept as law. When the same terms are generally accepted among nations,treaties become a valuable asset of concrete facts of practice and proper sources of international law. The principles may be so well established by successive treaties as to need no further treaty specification. Treaties and state papers vary greatly in value as sources of international law,however.

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Admin on Sat 11 May - 9:33

For this week, I’ll continue in International Law which is very interesting.
A State in the sense of public law isn’t sovereign in the sense of international law,if there are any limitations upon its power to enter into relations with other states. Such a state may be a member of a confederation with exercise certain powers giving it a qualified international status. These loose unions may, as in the German Confederation from 1815 to 1866,leave to the local states a certain degree of autonomy in regulating international affairs while granting to the central government certain specified powers. This division of international competence is usually a temporary compromise ending in new states or in a close union. In as much as both the central and the separate states carry on diplomatic intercourse with foreign powers, they must each and all be regarded as subjects of International Law,and in as much as they carry on such intercourse only in a limited degree they cannot be regarded as fully and absolutely sovereign.” In the examples of personal and real unions and the like,the nature of the state is a matter of public law and little concerns international law.As related to international law,the question is how far are such states restricted in their dealings with other states.A union,such as that existing in the case of the ruler of the U.K. of Great Britain and Ireland and Empire of India, is of importance to international law only in its united capacity,while for public law the nature of the union is of much significance.The same might be said of the unions of Austria-Hungary,and Sweden-Norway.

Admin
Admin

Messages : 813
Date d'inscription : 2009-01-10
Age : 36

View user profile http://verseau-quinny23.forumactif.com

Back to top Go down

Philosophy in English...different books... - Page 4 Empty Re: Philosophy in English...different books...

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 4 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum