Episode 34: What is an Ideology?

Episode 34: What is an Ideology?

In previous episodes I discussed the differences between genuine science and non-science or pseudo-science. In the current episode I address the broader question: What is an ideology and how does it differ from science? An ideology is a coherent set of beliefs, based on fundamental assumptions, which provide adherents with a consistent view of reality. It is not required of an ideology that it accurately reflects reality. This is the job of objective science. An ideology offers a biased and partial interpretation of reality. Examples are atheism, conservatism, liberalism etc.. A scientific theory faces the verdict of reality. An ideology can be upheld in the face of counter-evidence. Literature: M. Freeden, Ideology. A very brief Introduction (OUP 2003) D. Little: www-personal.umd.umich.edu S. Žižek, The Sublime Object of ideology (1989) Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Ideology [https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ideology/] Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Science and Ideology [https://iep.utm.edu/sci-ideo/]

Episode 33 Part II: The Social Functions of Humour

This is the second part of the episode on humour. It looks at the emotional and sociological functions of humour. Humour is a social phenomenon. The most important distinction is that between conservative and critical functions of humour. Conservative functions re-confirm us a members of a community which shares a sense of humour. Critical functions highlight deficiencies in the way we act, talk and think. Literature: https://jonathansandling.com [https://jonathansandling.com] Stanford Encylopedia of Philosophy [https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/humor/] Internet Encylopedia of Philosophy [https://iep.utm.edu/humor/] Carroll, N.: Humour. A Very Short Introduction. Oxford UP 2014 Critchley, S.: On Humour. Ebook Bradford 2002. Routledge 2002

Episode 33 Part I: Four Theories of Humour

Episode 33 is devoted to the question of humour or why we humans laugh. It consists of two parts. Part I discusses the pros and cons of the main theories of humour (Superiority theory; Relief theory; Play theory; Incongruity theory). Part II discusses the social functions of humour. It distinguishes a conservative from a critical function of humour. I give examples of different types of humour in each part. Literature: https://jonathansandling.com [https://jonathansandling.com] Stanford Encylopedia of Philosophy [https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/humor/] Internet Encylopedia of Philosophy [https://iep.utm.edu/humor/] Carroll, N.: Humour. A Very Short Introduction. Oxford UP 2014 Critchley, S.: On Humour. Ebook Bradford 2002. Routledge 2002

Episode 32: Trust: Its Role in Private and Public Life

This his episode consists of two parts. In Part I, I discuss the role of trust in personal relationships - called interpersonal trust. In the second part I consider the role of trust in people's relationships with institutions - called institutional trust. In both cases an expectation of benefits from the trustee to the truster is involved. We make inductive inferences from past experience of benefits to the expectation of future benefits. When the trustee turns out to be reliable we tend to trust them. Such expectations can be disappointed. When this happens it leads to distrust on the part of the truster. The trustee comes to be seen as untrustworthy. In the second part I emphasise the importance of trust in social and political institutions (from banks to universities). A free society cannot function properly, if people have no trust in the institutions (say, the government, the health system, the police etc.). In a dictatorship, trust is not needed because it is replaced by intimidation, fear violence. A democracy needs trust, because people always have the choice of alternatives (different political parties, newspapers, organizations). There is a vast amount of literature on trust. The following are good starting points: * Katherine Hawley, Trust. A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press (2012) * The Ethics and Epistemology of Trust, in The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. [https://iep.utm.edu/trust/#H2] On the notion of trust, you may also consult my paper: * Weinert, F.: ‘The Role of Trust in Political Systems. A Philosophical Perspective.’ Open Political Science 1 (2018): 7-15

Episode 31: What is Stoicism? (Marcus Aurelius)

In this Episode I look at the philosophy of Stoicism, through the eyes of the Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius (161-180 AD). As with so many things, Stoicism goes back to the Greeks; its impact reached into the Roman period. It is much more than composure in the face of adversity. It is a practical philosophy, a way of life: how to lead a wise life. Wisdom embraces justice, rationality and control over one's emotions. It also has political implications: the Stoic cares for the community of which s/he is a member. And there are cosmopolitan implications: the Stoic is part and parcel of the evolution of the cosmos, even though life is transient and short. Literature: -Marcus Aurelius; Meditations (many editions) -The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy [https://iep.utm.edu/marcus-aurelius]