Category Archives: Ethics
Dr. Katya Rogatchevskaia from the British Library made a fantastic presentation on the dangers and intentions of the propaganda in general and using specific examples from Russia, ranging from the first time used it by the last Romanovs in 1900s to the current leaders of the Russian Federation. Various issues were raised by her critical approach, which was illustrating potential power of propaganda used by any regime or system to pass a message to targeted and receptive audience. She focused on Noam Chomsky’s “The 5 Filters of the Mass Media Machine” to explore factors behind the Propaganda; its authority, message (which is difficult to disagree with), and intentions, particularly with the usage of selected aesthetics.
Can something stop being a propaganda? What influences these changes in “unloading” the objects, buildings, piece of art from the intention to indoctrinate? How much do we need to know to understand the context of the time to read the message and to be bothered by it?
We are very grateful to Katya for the thought-provoking lecture, where we need to reassess our own critical and therefore independent thinking, which we apply or not to assess the credibility and intent of the messages and news selected and presented in current media.
Once again Williams Project did not fail to impress when on Thursday 17th of January; Dr Nadine Rossol came in to speak to Chigwellians about everyday life in Nazi Germany. Dr Rossol spoke with passion and enthusiasm and provided a view on life in Nazi Germany differing from one which is learned within the classroom. Dr Rossol began her talk by speaking about her grandparents; two people who had lived through Nazi Germany, and one could certainly feel the connections Dr Rossol had with the topic she was speaking on. Dr Rossol talked about the involvement of ordinary people within the Nazi regime and used a photo of her grandfather to demonstrate how far down Nazism had penetrated into Germany. Dr Rossol spoke on a seeming ordinary photo of her grandfather on a football pitch, yet one could notice the young German players doing the Nazi salute. Dr Rossol explained that this was not a sign of Nazi appreciation as such, but more of an obligation that had to be fulfilled by these Germans simply because if not done these players would not have been allowed on the pitch. When learning about Nazi Germany, one must be wary of pinning the blame on the entire German population for what happened in World War 2 because as Dr Rossol explained there was indeed opposition to the Nazi regime, but also measures in place, such as the Gestapo, to keep Nazi opposition in the public at bay resulting in less open public opposition to the Nazi atrocities. Dr Rossol finished by referring to the Ringleblum archives; a collection of entries by people who desperately tried to reserve information about life in Germany pre-Nazi for future generations to learn about.
by Zain Raja
Robert Blakey – “Will criminal behaviour be treated one day like a brain-based cancer, rather than punished like evil?”
Monday the 4th of December marked the last Williams Project of 2018, as well as the last Williams Project with Mr Lord at the helm. With this in mind and with so many wonderful and insightful talks preceding him, Mr Robert Blakey, criminology doctoral candidate at the University of Oxford, had a hard task ahead of him. I’m sure it’s no surprise to hear that he did so with pure charisma and flawless knowledge with regard to his subject. Mr Blakey began his presentation by outlining the big question he would be attempting to answer: ‘Will criminal behaviour be one day treated like a brain-based cancer, rather than punished like evil?’ He began by giving us four concepts that contribute to a person’s offending: genes, social environment, brain activity and free will, and asked us to decide in what order they run in when contributing to a criminal committing a crime. We then proceeded to have an interactive discussion as a group in an attempt to order these notions, culminating in our successful ordering of the ideas. Mr Blakey then read us two scenarios about free will: one where, from a psychological point of view, our decisions were all caused by factors outside our control, and another similar but described in terms of chemical activity in our brains. He then invited us to stand on the left side of the room if we still believed the person in the example had free will or the right side if we believed they didn’t. It was interesting to see how many people moved to the side of no free will, particularly in the chemical scenario. This activity was thoroughly engaging and gave us a real opportunity to think things through for ourselves. Mr Blakey continued his fascinating talk by presenting the idea of rehabilitating criminals, especially young offenders, in good social environments instead of prisons as he noted that prisons are poor repairing facilities, as well as being detrimental to the mind of a youth offender. We spent the final minutes of the presentation trying to decide how to rehabilitate offenders, and whether there would ever be a perfect way to help lawbreakers. It was a captivating and highly perceptive talk that challenged us to think laterally with regards to many issues. Many thanks must go to Mr Blakey who we are sure would be very welcome to return to Chigwell in the near future.
Rory Hankins and Julie Vytrisalova
Priscilla Alderson (Professor Emerita of Childhood Studies, UCL) led the Williams Project in a thoughtful discussion of the philosophical basis for children’s rights, taking as starting points issues and questions raised by the young people there present. Her style was refreshingly different, and mirrored in itself her emphasis on the importance of listening to young people themselves.
A pop-up WP, for the VIth form only. Mr Maynes took us through a whole gamut of types of offensive humour, and, with admirable openness, tact and skill, engineered an intelligent, and at times impassioned, discussion about humour. Audio clips from comedians, with audience laughter, brought home the difficulty of finding something ‘funny’, but not wanting to laugh. Is it OK to share such jokes if no members of the target group are there, and if the teller knows no one will be offended? Or should one only tell jokes which one could tell to anyone?
The conversation continued over dinner, where several students expressed with relief that now for the first time they felt able to discuss things like gender and race in an official school setting.
Dr. Florian Steinberger, philosopher and lecturer at Birkbeck College, University of London, spoke to both branches of the Williams Project. He spoke to us about two very different philosophical topics, beginning with “animal rights”: what are they? Do animals really have them and should we respect them? There were multiple discussions, questions and debates on whether animals could really have preferences and feelings to be deserving of rights as humans do. We also covered the issue of why we are willing to protect them to a certain extent, nonetheless, also willing to consume them. We outlined the religious, moral and health aspects linked to the matter to delve deeper into if we could and should give animals rights. The discussion was thoroughly enjoyed by all of us of all age groups, being a very controversial and interactive talking point.
He continued with second session on the topic of “infinity” – a more mathematical approach towards philosophy and the possibility and impossibility of infinity, the contradictions and the proof – in particular whether some kinds of infinity can be greater than others (for example the infinity of real numbers can be shown to be larger than the infinity of integers). Although complex for a few of us(!), many were able to grasp the concept of how infinity could be perceived; it was an engaging and stimulating lecture on a rather unfamiliar topic.
We are grateful for the discussions led by Dr. Steinberger, and thank him for enlightening us on two of the many contemporary philosophical issues we face today.