Theme 6
1)Hello Ellinor! Just like you I also had a hard time figuring out what a "case study" exactly meant what properties it had. You have some sort of picture in your head of what a case study is, mine was similar to yours. But I learned that a case study means researching something in a field were little is known and is often used to learn what questions to ask in a later study. This is something that has occurred multiple times in this course. We learn about a scientific concept that we think we understand but then we learn that our understanding is very limited, like the concept of "theory" for example.2) Greetings Anton!Seems like you learned a lot about case studies this week! You mention that case studies should investigate a small and narrow field. I think that this is what defines a case study. Do describe case studies as "organic" is very spot on. While I have never conducted a case study, I would take a wild guess and say that case studies probably often takes unexpected turns. And if the case study shows something interesting it might be worth looking into with a proper thorough research.
3) Hello!Great reflection! It is well written and it is easy to follow your thoughts. From my seminar I learned that a case study is not meant to be approached with a hypothesis but I was not certain why. But after reading your reflection it is clear to me that this is because there isn't enough knowledge in the field for a hypothesis to be formulated. This alone says a lot about case studies - there is so little known in the field that the approach is nothing more than a simple question - "what is this?". If the findings are of any interest then a proper investigation can be motivated based on the findings from the case study.
4) Hello Marcus!You mention something very interesting in your reflection that made me go "aha!". What you mention is why case studies are conducted in fields where very little is known and why you do not want to formulate any hypothesis in advance. Your answer is that you want an open mind looking in to whatever your case study is investigating. A hypothesis or some knowledge in the field might affect the study which I believe is something that you do not want. I think an open mind is crucial for conducting a successful case study.
5) Hello Oscar! I think you had some really interesting discussions during your seminar. I think the main reason for avoiding hypotheses in case studies is that you want an open mind when investigating a case. But with a hypothesis or a theory in mind then the result will probably be affected by this. I also started thinking why one would even conduct a case study if one cannot draw any general conclusions and I believe the main reason is to conduct future research. A case study is a way of looking into something that might be of interest. And if it happens to be then it can motivate a proper research.
6) Hello Rasmus!I understand what you mean by qualitative studies having a "social aspect". I think this is very hard to avoid since the usual methods of a qualitative study involves some sort of social interaction with people. On the one hand this means it's hard to have an objective perspective but it also allows research to involve perspectives that are hard to quantify, like feelings and intuition. Sometimes a story is the better way of presenting a study than a table.
7) Hello Arvid!An interestning reflection indeed. I think your thoughts on case studies are spot on. The important thing is to isolate the case and look at a specific detail. It is also important to not have any hypothesis or similar before going into the case study. But if the study is about something new and unexplored then a hypothesis is difficult to formulate. Byebye!
8) Heyo Måns!It was interesting to hear stuff from your seminar. We did not discuss documentaries at all so that was news to me. I had no idea that a documentary can be viewed as a researched methods. I understand that it is hard for a documentary to be objective, but I think that is also the case in a qualitative study.You mention that a case study looks at something unique and therefor cannot be used to confirm a theory. I agree. The point of conducting a case study is to explore a entirely new area and see if there is something of interest in it to motivate a future study.
9) Hi Rebecka!Interesting thoughts on this week's theme! I like your view on case studies which contains what was said during my seminar. I think one should be careful when comparing case studies and qualitative/quantitative studies since their applications are very different. A case study is not conducted to confirm a theory, rather to show if there is a possibility that a theory can even be hypothesized.
10) Hello Isabella!Great reflection! I also had a hard time understanding what a case study was before Ilias explained it during my seminar. I think that just looking up and reading a case study was not the best way of understanding the concept so it was good that he gave us his own explanation. I agree that the topics of quantitative and qualitative methods should have been discussed during the same week since it is so easy to compare them when discussing them.
Theme 5
1) Hey Ducky!Seems like you enjoyed this weeks lectures and learned a thing or two. It would be interesting if you compared the two lectures. I thought that Haibo's lecture was more practical, just as you pointed out, and more connected to the real world. While the second lecture talked about design research from an academic point of view. I think that both perspectives are equally important.2) Dear Emil. Sure seems like you gained some knowledge this week! I think you especially presented a fine reflection of the second lecture. A prototype really is a tool that provides us with (hopefully) useful knowledge that help us realize an idea. The fact that the data that comes from a prototype and the design research around it is so called "artificial" is very interesting. Since it's something that we don't just observe but create ourselves I think it's hard to be objective. Looking forward to your final blogposts!
3) Dear Arvid!I think you've done a great job summarizing this weeks theme. You present the lectures in a good and easy readable way. It seems that Haibo Lee's lecture did a bigger impact on you. I think Haibo said some great things about ideas and entrepreneurship. Like how you should present your idea in the right way. It differed a lot from everything else we've read so far in this course but I think it was very useful to hear as a future engineer. It seems like you also liked that perspective of the lecture.
4) Hey Björn!I think you have written a great reflection. Your writing makes it easy to follow your trail of thoughts. Too bad you felt like you couldn't fully appreciate Haibo's lecture because you didn't have an idea of your own. Maybe the day that idea pops in your head what Haibo said will make much more sense. What I think is important from that lecture is the importance of defining an idea before attempting to solve it, the idea of proof-of-concept and how one presents the proof-of-concept in the best way.
5) Hi! You have made a good reflection that is easy to follow and contains great thoughts and facts about this theme. You say something very interesting that I fully support by stating that it is analysis that turns something into research. Just as you say the method only defines the data. But I also believe that the choice of method also dictates what kind of answer you will get.
6) Hi! Well summarized and good writing! I think you mention something very simple but true regarding prototypes: that a prototype allows you to explore the concept with you senses. This makes it so much easier to understand how the people behind the idea are thinking. I do not believe this has been said in the course so far, maybe it is implicit. You also mention the importance of evaluation, which is something very common in media technology. It gives us insight on for example user experience.
7) Hello Rasmus,You express very interesting thoughts in this blog post. We have learned that the concept of design is very complex but your attempt of presenting your own view on it made me understand how others might view it. I would like to hear what you thought of the second lecture where the lecturer talked about the academic view of design and prototypes, although you write interesting things about prototypes and their purpose in a satisfying way.
8) Hello Ellinor! I really enjoy how you connect this theme with previous themes and also even previous courses. I never linked some of the course content from the Human-Computer Interaction course but after reading your blog post it makes total sense! Your definition of design research (=designed problem solving) was very clever and agree with you on that one.
9) Hello Rickard! Great blog post! While I agree that being able to sell your idea is important, it's maybe not always the best measure of success. Success can mean a lot of things apart from making profit. Scientific contribution, sustainable development, increased well-being etc. Although Haibo did mention that a great idea is worth "billions of dollars" I think there is more to it than that.
10) Hello Marcus! I agree that Haibo's lecture was a bit shallow without much detail information. While success in the shape of financial success can in some way dictate if an idea is good or not, it shouldn't be the only factor in play. Success can be measured in many ways. Today many of our biggest companies in ICT are still not making a single dollar in profit (Spotify for example). Are they not successful?
Theme 4
1) Dear Emil!Let me just start up by congratulating you on a great blog post. I was familiar with the topic before this theme just like you. It seems that you learned a thing or two. I found it interesting when you mentioned that not only qualitative but also quantitative data collection methods (in the form of Big Data) can be used when looking in "uncharted territory". I hadn't thought of that before. Still one has to know what kind of answer one is looking for in order to choose method.
2) Greetings Arvid!I recognized myself in a lot of your thoughts. I also found this theme to be more straightforward since I knew about the different research methods before. Before the seminar I also had a difficult time interpreting qualitative results. One must see and interpret the results in a different way than the results from a quantitative study since the participants of a qualitative research can have totally different views on the subject, just as you say. Keep up the good work!
3) Hello!Great blog post! You seem to have drawn almost the same conclusions as me regarding what characterizes qualitative and quantitative research. But I also believe that a lot also has to do with what kind of answer one is after. In some situations it might be relevant to present opinions or feelings with quantitative data, because of the answer one is after (although that it unusual.
4) Hello!You present some very interesting thoughts in this reflection, like your reflection regarding qualitative research and how it can lead to loss of data and generalizations. I had never really thought about that and it wasn't mentioned in our seminar so I'm glad I got to hear it from you. The debate about whether quantitative methods is a must in scientific research research was also interesting. I would have to say that I don't believe that one always needs quantitative research methods, I think a lot depends on the question and what kind of answer you are looking for.
5) Hello!I find the discussions from your seminar very interesting. Especially in what types of studies it is relevant to use both a qualitative and a quantitative research method. I believe it all depends on what kind of answer you are looking for. If you want a model that considers both forms of data then use both. I got curious to how you came up with the conclusion that both methods are useful when studying perceived use versus actual use.
6) Hey Björn! Interesting thoughts about Illias' paper about VR and virtual body ownership. I did think about it while I was reading it but I never discussed it during my seminar. Maybe a qualitative research method had showed something else. As we have learned during this theme, the method one chooses depends on what kind of questions one is after. Just as you say, most of has had already some knowledge regarding this topic but it's good that you still managed to obtain some interesting insight.
7) Hey!Great reflection! You cover this theme in a very good and easily understandable way. Your thoughts on questionnaires are very interesting and made me think about how to design the best possible questionnaires, and how do you possible know when it is the best? After conducting the data collection?
8) Hello!I also had prior knowledge regarding this theme so it didn't feel as new and complex as previous themes. But I still believe that there are other interesting things to pick up from this theme, like the paper by Ilias and his colleges about virtual body ownership that I also found very interesting. I found their approach and research method very interesting since I would say, without knowing which research method they used, that a qualitative method would be to prefer. But in this case, based on the answer they were looking for, a quantitative method was the most reasonable.
9) Hello!Great reflection on this theme. Your comment about the order of the questions makes a lot of sense. Just as you I knew some of the material in this theme from before which made the whole theme feel less complex this week. Your discussion about when to use both research methods was interesting. I agree with you that the situation decides what is more suitable.
10) Hey Anton!Sure seems like you had a fruitful seminar. Your discussions about qualitative and quantitative research and data are well formulated and inspiring. You give great explanations on the difference between qualitative and quantitative studies; differences in how one analyze the data, choose which method, interpret the results etc. I learned a thing or two! Keep up the good work!
2) Hi!Your take on theory is very interesting. You write about mathematics and if they are theory. You conclude that math is based on a priori knowledge and can therefore not be theory but then you mention that there exist mathematical theories. If they are not theories, then what are they? I liked your conclusion regarding theory and knowledge , theory itself is not knowledge but that it can lead to knowledge and to other theories.
3) Hello!You have managed to cover the major parts of this theme in a well formulated way. You mention the difference between a philosophical theory and a scientific theory in a satisfying way, I can't help but wonder however, if you cannot test a philosophical theory through research or observation, can you ever test it and what is its purpose? You make a great summary of the lecture by Dahlberg about theory and it's properties. One can tell that your understanding of the concept has expanded and just like you I will remember that truth is relative, especially when it comes to theory.
Good job!
4) Hi Rebecka!Just as you I found it odd to suddenly hear that theories are not complete. They cannot actually prove something completely. But when you think about it, there is always the possibility that all tests of a theory are random exceptions. We are also limited in our perception of the world. I liked your ending of this blogpost and agree that theory might not in itself be knowledge, but it can lead to knowledge.
5) Hi! You have written a good summary of this theme. Good job. I enjoyed your mentioning of paradigm. In physics we have great examples of paradigms (like your mentioning of the quantum)- how suddenly the world as we thought we knew it changes and our theories are not applicable to everything. This is very interesting since those "old" theories gave us knowledge. But I believe that knowledge is still relevant, we just have to think of it in a new way.
6) Hello!I agree with you that this theme wasn't as abstract as the previous and not as philosophical. We have all come across theories before but now we got to expand our knowledge about theory. I can't really think of a situation were a diagram can support an entire theory. It can probably be a big part of the theory, but it also needs logical reasoning and often other theories to be accepted as a theory by a majority.
7) Hello! I think that your blogpost summarizes this theme in a very satisfying way. I agree with you that the terms theory and hypothesis are often mixed up or viewed as synonyms. But at least we know the difference and can teach others. I like your explanation of the difference between theory and hypothesis. Theory needs logical argumentation besides something observed/studied.
8) Hello!Great blog post! I especially enjoyed reading the last part of your text, about how truth is relative. If I understood you correctly you say that just as we once thought earth was flat, today we might regard things as the truth that will one day maybe be regarded as silly as the earth being flat. Just as you say, truth is tied to time and space. I also believe that it is also tied to our limited perception of the world through our senses
9) Dear Anton!The part of your text where you discuss the relation between truth and theory was very well formulated and interesting. You also wove in a bit of Kant it seems (I would guess it was intentional) which made me connect our first theme with this theme much better. Your groups discussion about Mathematics was thought provoking and made me think about the fundamentals of math. It would be interesting to learn more about that, it is probably a very discussed subject.
Good job!
10) Dear Arvid.I enjoyed reading your explanation of a weak and a strong theory. The subject didn't come up during my discussion at the seminar so thank you for explaining. You mentioned the following phrase: "correlation does not imply causation". I believe this is vital to know. I remember this from my statistic class and how dangerous it can be to instantly assume that a correlation means a causation.
2) Greetings Arvid!I recognized myself in a lot of your thoughts. I also found this theme to be more straightforward since I knew about the different research methods before. Before the seminar I also had a difficult time interpreting qualitative results. One must see and interpret the results in a different way than the results from a quantitative study since the participants of a qualitative research can have totally different views on the subject, just as you say. Keep up the good work!
3) Hello!Great blog post! You seem to have drawn almost the same conclusions as me regarding what characterizes qualitative and quantitative research. But I also believe that a lot also has to do with what kind of answer one is after. In some situations it might be relevant to present opinions or feelings with quantitative data, because of the answer one is after (although that it unusual.
4) Hello!You present some very interesting thoughts in this reflection, like your reflection regarding qualitative research and how it can lead to loss of data and generalizations. I had never really thought about that and it wasn't mentioned in our seminar so I'm glad I got to hear it from you. The debate about whether quantitative methods is a must in scientific research research was also interesting. I would have to say that I don't believe that one always needs quantitative research methods, I think a lot depends on the question and what kind of answer you are looking for.
5) Hello!I find the discussions from your seminar very interesting. Especially in what types of studies it is relevant to use both a qualitative and a quantitative research method. I believe it all depends on what kind of answer you are looking for. If you want a model that considers both forms of data then use both. I got curious to how you came up with the conclusion that both methods are useful when studying perceived use versus actual use.
6) Hey Björn! Interesting thoughts about Illias' paper about VR and virtual body ownership. I did think about it while I was reading it but I never discussed it during my seminar. Maybe a qualitative research method had showed something else. As we have learned during this theme, the method one chooses depends on what kind of questions one is after. Just as you say, most of has had already some knowledge regarding this topic but it's good that you still managed to obtain some interesting insight.
7) Hey!Great reflection! You cover this theme in a very good and easily understandable way. Your thoughts on questionnaires are very interesting and made me think about how to design the best possible questionnaires, and how do you possible know when it is the best? After conducting the data collection?
8) Hello!I also had prior knowledge regarding this theme so it didn't feel as new and complex as previous themes. But I still believe that there are other interesting things to pick up from this theme, like the paper by Ilias and his colleges about virtual body ownership that I also found very interesting. I found their approach and research method very interesting since I would say, without knowing which research method they used, that a qualitative method would be to prefer. But in this case, based on the answer they were looking for, a quantitative method was the most reasonable.
9) Hello!Great reflection on this theme. Your comment about the order of the questions makes a lot of sense. Just as you I knew some of the material in this theme from before which made the whole theme feel less complex this week. Your discussion about when to use both research methods was interesting. I agree with you that the situation decides what is more suitable.
10) Hey Anton!Sure seems like you had a fruitful seminar. Your discussions about qualitative and quantitative research and data are well formulated and inspiring. You give great explanations on the difference between qualitative and quantitative studies; differences in how one analyze the data, choose which method, interpret the results etc. I learned a thing or two! Keep up the good work!
Theme 3
1) Hello Måns!Too bad the lecture didn't feel so interesting but I'm glad the seminar sparked some thoughts. I agree with you that this theme was a bit different than the previous in the sense that the approach to the subject wasn't as philosophical. I find it interesting that your group in the seminar found the texts contradicting, it would be interesting to know in what way. My understanding of theory is that presenting data is not enough to have a theory acknowledged, you also need logical reasoning.2) Hi!Your take on theory is very interesting. You write about mathematics and if they are theory. You conclude that math is based on a priori knowledge and can therefore not be theory but then you mention that there exist mathematical theories. If they are not theories, then what are they? I liked your conclusion regarding theory and knowledge , theory itself is not knowledge but that it can lead to knowledge and to other theories.
3) Hello!You have managed to cover the major parts of this theme in a well formulated way. You mention the difference between a philosophical theory and a scientific theory in a satisfying way, I can't help but wonder however, if you cannot test a philosophical theory through research or observation, can you ever test it and what is its purpose? You make a great summary of the lecture by Dahlberg about theory and it's properties. One can tell that your understanding of the concept has expanded and just like you I will remember that truth is relative, especially when it comes to theory.
Good job!
4) Hi Rebecka!Just as you I found it odd to suddenly hear that theories are not complete. They cannot actually prove something completely. But when you think about it, there is always the possibility that all tests of a theory are random exceptions. We are also limited in our perception of the world. I liked your ending of this blogpost and agree that theory might not in itself be knowledge, but it can lead to knowledge.
5) Hi! You have written a good summary of this theme. Good job. I enjoyed your mentioning of paradigm. In physics we have great examples of paradigms (like your mentioning of the quantum)- how suddenly the world as we thought we knew it changes and our theories are not applicable to everything. This is very interesting since those "old" theories gave us knowledge. But I believe that knowledge is still relevant, we just have to think of it in a new way.
6) Hello!I agree with you that this theme wasn't as abstract as the previous and not as philosophical. We have all come across theories before but now we got to expand our knowledge about theory. I can't really think of a situation were a diagram can support an entire theory. It can probably be a big part of the theory, but it also needs logical reasoning and often other theories to be accepted as a theory by a majority.
7) Hello! I think that your blogpost summarizes this theme in a very satisfying way. I agree with you that the terms theory and hypothesis are often mixed up or viewed as synonyms. But at least we know the difference and can teach others. I like your explanation of the difference between theory and hypothesis. Theory needs logical argumentation besides something observed/studied.
8) Hello!Great blog post! I especially enjoyed reading the last part of your text, about how truth is relative. If I understood you correctly you say that just as we once thought earth was flat, today we might regard things as the truth that will one day maybe be regarded as silly as the earth being flat. Just as you say, truth is tied to time and space. I also believe that it is also tied to our limited perception of the world through our senses
9) Dear Anton!The part of your text where you discuss the relation between truth and theory was very well formulated and interesting. You also wove in a bit of Kant it seems (I would guess it was intentional) which made me connect our first theme with this theme much better. Your groups discussion about Mathematics was thought provoking and made me think about the fundamentals of math. It would be interesting to learn more about that, it is probably a very discussed subject.
Good job!
10) Dear Arvid.I enjoyed reading your explanation of a weak and a strong theory. The subject didn't come up during my discussion at the seminar so thank you for explaining. You mentioned the following phrase: "correlation does not imply causation". I believe this is vital to know. I remember this from my statistic class and how dangerous it can be to instantly assume that a correlation means a causation.
Theme 2
1) Hey Anton! Great reflection. I can see that we attended to the same seminar only by reading your text. We seem to have very similar opinions and understanding about theme 2! Something you brought up, which I didn't, was whether there is something as "good art" or "bad art". It's not the easiest to fully understand Benjamin's opinion but reading your reflection helped!
2) Dear Arvid! Great blogpost! I like how you explain why Adorno and Horkheimer thinks that nominalism can be dangerous and why media can affect society. Looking forward to reading your blog next week!
3) Dear Emil! Great blog post! I really enjoyed your explanation of the difference between nominalism and platonic realism. The example with the apple helped me understand the difference between them much better. I think the platonic realist's opinion that there is a "true apple" is interesting but not something i personally believe in.
4) Hi Marcus! You start your blog post by stating that you didn't understand the authors situation (place and time). I think this goes for all of us. It's hard for us to fully understand what the text are referring to since we cannot relate to that period in time. But by studying not only texts but also the authors or what events might have affected the texts. I enjoyed your explanation of the term aura with the hat and the rocker, it's a very relevant explanation today.
5) Hi! A great blog post that really captured the essence of theme 2. I agree with you that context is crucial for understanding these texts. The first time I read Benjamin's text I had no idea about who he really was, what events that formed his text or his tragic faith. After learning all this during the lecture I understood them much better. Keep up the good work!
6) Hi Rebecka! Great blog post! I like your way of explaining the concepts of this weeks theme. I like that you involve your own personal opinion by saying that no one today questions the great influence of media. I totally agree with you that Benjamin seems to have made a better prediction of the future than Horkheimer and Adorno
7) Hey Calle! I like the part of your text where you write about how cultural production affects the actual culture and that it takes time for changes to happen in superstructures. I also like your hypothesis of why Adorno and Horkheimer didn't realize the revolutionary potential within media - their amount of media-channels weren't big enough
8) Hi! Great blog post! You mention the current events and era that formed both Benjamin's and Adorno & Horkheimers texts. That really made me think about the fact that these two texts writes about a common subject but from two completely different backgrounds. Benjamin writes with Germany in the 30's as starting point while Adorno & Horkheimer were in America a decade later. I think you really captured this weeks theme in a well-written way!
9) Hi! I also had difficulties grasping the term "aura". I think that was because the examples that Benjamin presents in his text are a but out of context today. Your example with an art piece at a museum is more suitable today!
10) Hi! Great blog post! I think you mentioned everything relevant from this theme. I really liked your last paragraph where you mention the view on media today. Since the access of technology that could "capture culture" was so limited during the 30's and 40's, the government really had a big influence in culture. But today were the technology needed is available we are all creators of culture.
2) Hi Calle! Great post! I found your discussion about experience limiting our thinking as very interesting and something I have never thought about before. Your discussion about objective knowledge was similar to ours but we didn't discussed the concept of "truth" so that part of your post was interesting. I agree with you that since we cannot be sure that there is such a thing as objective knowledge then the same thing applies with truth.
3) Hey Emil!What a delightful read! I especially liked the part where you explain the purpose of Kant's twelve categories very methodically and easy understandable. I learned a thing or two!
Keep up the good work!
4) Hi Anton! Great blog post! I enjoyed how you linked Plato's Theaetetus and Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. I also liked your quote from Kant's perspective "Our faculties of knowledge limits us from perceiving the world objectively" - I think you great promise and that you understood the texts from theme 1. Looking forward to reading more blog posts from you!
5) Hi! Great blog post. You wrote that you initial understanding of some of Kant's thoughts about a priori and posteriori where not entirely true. I think this goes for most of us. I also find it difficult at first but the seminar helped me understand. You also wrote that Kant's main objective was to explain knowledge and perception and that a priori and posteriori are just ways of doing so - which I agree on! Kant's starting point is that there is lots of knowledge in the world, he never questions this. He wants to know HOW the knowledge is structured.
6) Hi! I like how you discussed differences and similarities between Kant and Plato - both are aware that our senses (perception) is between us and objective knowledge. A found your discussion in the seminar about truth interesting. We did not have that discussion unfortunately so it's good that you mentioned it!
7) Hi! I really enjoyed reading about Kant's ideal of objectivity and his categories. You explained it in a very good way. It's also very good that you went to an external source to understand it better, I will try to do so myself for next theme.
8) Hi Rebecka! Great blog post! I believe you really grasp Kant's theories and thoughts. You write the following: "Objectivity is not objectivity in itself since we have created the term and definition". This is something I never thought about or remember being mentioned at the lecture or seminar, so I find it really interesting. It shows that us human will always perceive knowledge and the world through our senses, there is no way around that.
9) Hi Arvid! I also had troubles understanding the texts but things cleared up slowly. You write about how we will never be able to see the world in a truly objective way and that our view differs from one human to another and that without context and earlier experiences nothing in the world makes sense anymore. I agree with you. Everything we experience goes through our senses and is compared to all previous experience. Although Kant says that we can in someway, It's hard be truly objective.
10) Hi! Great post. I also had a hard time understanding the texts but eventually things clear up. I find you discussion about Kant interesting but I would have liked some explanation to why according to you Kant believes we can have a truly objective view of the world.
2) Dear Arvid! Great blogpost! I like how you explain why Adorno and Horkheimer thinks that nominalism can be dangerous and why media can affect society. Looking forward to reading your blog next week!
3) Dear Emil! Great blog post! I really enjoyed your explanation of the difference between nominalism and platonic realism. The example with the apple helped me understand the difference between them much better. I think the platonic realist's opinion that there is a "true apple" is interesting but not something i personally believe in.
4) Hi Marcus! You start your blog post by stating that you didn't understand the authors situation (place and time). I think this goes for all of us. It's hard for us to fully understand what the text are referring to since we cannot relate to that period in time. But by studying not only texts but also the authors or what events might have affected the texts. I enjoyed your explanation of the term aura with the hat and the rocker, it's a very relevant explanation today.
5) Hi! A great blog post that really captured the essence of theme 2. I agree with you that context is crucial for understanding these texts. The first time I read Benjamin's text I had no idea about who he really was, what events that formed his text or his tragic faith. After learning all this during the lecture I understood them much better. Keep up the good work!
6) Hi Rebecka! Great blog post! I like your way of explaining the concepts of this weeks theme. I like that you involve your own personal opinion by saying that no one today questions the great influence of media. I totally agree with you that Benjamin seems to have made a better prediction of the future than Horkheimer and Adorno
7) Hey Calle! I like the part of your text where you write about how cultural production affects the actual culture and that it takes time for changes to happen in superstructures. I also like your hypothesis of why Adorno and Horkheimer didn't realize the revolutionary potential within media - their amount of media-channels weren't big enough
8) Hi! Great blog post! You mention the current events and era that formed both Benjamin's and Adorno & Horkheimers texts. That really made me think about the fact that these two texts writes about a common subject but from two completely different backgrounds. Benjamin writes with Germany in the 30's as starting point while Adorno & Horkheimer were in America a decade later. I think you really captured this weeks theme in a well-written way!
9) Hi! I also had difficulties grasping the term "aura". I think that was because the examples that Benjamin presents in his text are a but out of context today. Your example with an art piece at a museum is more suitable today!
10) Hi! Great blog post! I think you mentioned everything relevant from this theme. I really liked your last paragraph where you mention the view on media today. Since the access of technology that could "capture culture" was so limited during the 30's and 40's, the government really had a big influence in culture. But today were the technology needed is available we are all creators of culture.
Theme 1
1) Hi! Great blogpost! I think it is really good that you explore other sources to help you understand better, very cleaver. I think you and your seminare came to a really good conclusion when comparing Plato and Kant by saying that "Plato thinks that that means that we should try to eliminate the senses and their influence and use pure thought. Kant meanwhile is of the opinion that since we can’t ignore our senses we should use them instead, and experiment with the world as we perceive it". It made me understand their two different views a bit better :)2) Hi Calle! Great post! I found your discussion about experience limiting our thinking as very interesting and something I have never thought about before. Your discussion about objective knowledge was similar to ours but we didn't discussed the concept of "truth" so that part of your post was interesting. I agree with you that since we cannot be sure that there is such a thing as objective knowledge then the same thing applies with truth.
3) Hey Emil!What a delightful read! I especially liked the part where you explain the purpose of Kant's twelve categories very methodically and easy understandable. I learned a thing or two!
Keep up the good work!
4) Hi Anton! Great blog post! I enjoyed how you linked Plato's Theaetetus and Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. I also liked your quote from Kant's perspective "Our faculties of knowledge limits us from perceiving the world objectively" - I think you great promise and that you understood the texts from theme 1. Looking forward to reading more blog posts from you!
5) Hi! Great blog post. You wrote that you initial understanding of some of Kant's thoughts about a priori and posteriori where not entirely true. I think this goes for most of us. I also find it difficult at first but the seminar helped me understand. You also wrote that Kant's main objective was to explain knowledge and perception and that a priori and posteriori are just ways of doing so - which I agree on! Kant's starting point is that there is lots of knowledge in the world, he never questions this. He wants to know HOW the knowledge is structured.
6) Hi! I like how you discussed differences and similarities between Kant and Plato - both are aware that our senses (perception) is between us and objective knowledge. A found your discussion in the seminar about truth interesting. We did not have that discussion unfortunately so it's good that you mentioned it!
7) Hi! I really enjoyed reading about Kant's ideal of objectivity and his categories. You explained it in a very good way. It's also very good that you went to an external source to understand it better, I will try to do so myself for next theme.
8) Hi Rebecka! Great blog post! I believe you really grasp Kant's theories and thoughts. You write the following: "Objectivity is not objectivity in itself since we have created the term and definition". This is something I never thought about or remember being mentioned at the lecture or seminar, so I find it really interesting. It shows that us human will always perceive knowledge and the world through our senses, there is no way around that.
9) Hi Arvid! I also had troubles understanding the texts but things cleared up slowly. You write about how we will never be able to see the world in a truly objective way and that our view differs from one human to another and that without context and earlier experiences nothing in the world makes sense anymore. I agree with you. Everything we experience goes through our senses and is compared to all previous experience. Although Kant says that we can in someway, It's hard be truly objective.
10) Hi! Great post. I also had a hard time understanding the texts but eventually things clear up. I find you discussion about Kant interesting but I would have liked some explanation to why according to you Kant believes we can have a truly objective view of the world.
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar