Last Lecture Notes- Rousseau

• Was part of a group of French intellectuals, the most famous of them being Voltaire. Most noticeable for creating the first encyclopedia.
• Died a decade before the French Revolution.
• Believed before civilisation, people were generally good. Believed society damaged humanity.
• Was thought to be the founder of the Romantic Period.
• He was against the enlightenment.
• 'Man is born free and is everywhere in chains.' Was and still is a famous Roussaeu quote.
• His book 'the social contract' caused uproar. It was burnt and Rousseau had to flee. He fled to England to stay with Hume, but because he was so paranoid, he fell out with Hume.
• He made an attack on Hobbes' 'State of Nature'. Hobbes says that in the state of nature, there is constant war. Rousseau says that Hobbes wasn't thinking far enough back because war is only in civilisation and society. He thought that in the real state of nature, there was no war because war did not exist at that time.
• He also made an attack on Locke.
• Rousseau and 'General Will' -He believed that everyone should agree on something before it should be made law.

Seminar Paper (Part 2) Hume: Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding

I decided to focus on three sections of this essay. which are, of the origin of ideas, the association of ideas and of probability.

• Of The Origin Of Ideas
• Hume believes that there is a considerable difference between the perception of the mind and when you later recall that sensation or anticipate it by imagination. E.g if you was to touch a hot kettle or feel the warmth of a heater, you will be able to mimic or copy this sensation, but you will never be able to entirely mimic it to reach the full force of vivacity as the original sentiment.
• He believes that the mind can portray these sensations in such a lively way that you almost believe it's real. But it can never be as real as the original sensation or real object. He says in his essay "all the colours of poetry, however splendid, can never paint natural objects in such a manner as to make the description be taken for a real landskipe".
• "A man in a fit of anger, is actuated in a very different manner from one who only thinks of that emotion. If you tell me, that any person is in love, I easily understand your meaning, and from a just conception of his situation; but never can mistake that for the real disorders and agitations of the passion". I think Hume is trying to say that when you think about an emotion, such as anger or love, the perception/idea you get in your head is actually different to the actual emotion itself that one would feel.
• He says we can divide all the perceptions in our mind into two classes or species. The less forcible ones are called denominated thoughts or ideas, the other is called impressions. Impressions are, are more lively perceptions such as when we hear, see, feel, love, hate, or desire, or will. Impressions are distinguished from ideas, such as the ones mentioned above.
• He believes that our mind and thoughts are unbounded, they can help us to imagine things far beyond our universe. But the creative power of the mind amounts to no more than the faculty of compounding, transporting, augmenting, or diminishing the materials afforded to us by the senses and experiences we have been through. He says "all our ideas or more feeble perceptions are copies of our impressions of more lively ones". E.g If you imagine a flying car, you think of a car, then you think of wings or a bird, then you imagine them together to give yourself the idea of a flying car.
• "We shall always find, that every idea which we examine is copied from a similar  impression".
• "A person to have enjoyed his sight for thirty years, and to have become perfectly acquainted with colours of all kinds except one particular shade of blue, for instance, which it never has been his fortune to meet with. Let all the different shades of that colour, except that single one, be placed before him, descending gradually from the deepest to the lightest, it is plain that he will perceive a blank, where that shade is wanting, and will be sensible that there is a greater distance in that place between the contiguous colour than in any other". I personally don't agree with what Hume is saying here, because if I see a colour that I have never seen before, my mind may draw a blank in the sense that I wont initially recognise it, but I don't think it will draw a blank in the sense that I will see a gap between that colour and the next. I have come across colours that I have seen for the first time and when I saw them  for the first time I don't see a larger blank space when I look at them. Maybe I don't completely understand what Hume is trying to say, but if he is saying what I think he is trying to say, I disagree. 
• Hume believes that all sensations, either outward or inward are strong and vivid, therefore it is not easy to fall into any error or mistake in regards to them.
• Hume says if you have an idea in your head but you cant derive from what original impression it stems from, that will serve to confirm suspicion about that idea.
• He doesn't believe in innate ideas, meaning ideas that you had in your mind from before you were born or were born with. He believes that all ideas are copies of our impressions.  
• He thinks that the word "ideas" is used very loosely by Locke and others.
• The association Of Ideas
• "In our more serious thinking or discourse this is so observable that any particular thought, which breaks in upon the regular tract or chain of ideas, is immediately remarked and rejected". Which I think is true, because when a thought creeps into my mind, that is not relevant to my main course of thought, my mind automatically dismisses it. But then there are times when you are trying not think about something, because it may upset, or frustrates you, but your mind just wont let you not think about it. I wonder what Hume's answer to that would be, as I don't think he touches on that in this essay.
• He says there appear to be only three principles among connexion of ideas, which are resemblance, contiguity in time or place, and cause or effect.
• My Example on Hume's association of ideas. If you I was to say that I live at the house with the only red door on this street, you will be able to find my house because you use your association with the colour red and connect it with a door to find my house on that street.
• Of Probability
• My definition on Hume's probability- If you have a pack of 50 cards and 49 of them are 6 of hearts and only one of them is a 2 of spades, then it is more likely that you will draw the 6 of hearts.
• When is talking about probability I think he is trying to say, for example, if one was to say, it will rain next November that is only a probability. The reason why one would think it was a probability is because in the past it has rained for at least one day in November for the past ten years. Which means one would use the past to predict the future, which would mean that it's more probable that it will rain next November, even though it is not a proof or even that we will see next November.
• Overall I think that David Hume is incredibly smart and that out of all of the Philosophers/ intellectuals, he is the most believable and comprehendible of them all. I think that I only disagreed with one thing he said and I don't question anything that he is saying

Seminar Paper On Joseph Addison's The Adventures Of A Shilling

Joseph Addison's ,'The adventures of a shilling' allows the reader to imagine what it would be like if you were to follow a single shilling around from the day it was made, until the day it was taken out of circulation. The way that Addison is able to do this in this essay is incredibly smart, as he is able to make the shilling seem life like with human qualities such as feelings, emotions and also the awareness of space and time. Because Addison is able to do this so well, as you are reading this essay it can be easy to forget that you are reading about a shilling and not the life of a human.

The essay starts off by Addison having a conversation with his friend at his house, when his friend says to him. "I defy any of these active persons to produce half the adventures that this twelve pence piece has been engaged in, were it possible for him to give us an account of his life". This was the comment that Addison says left an odd impression on his mind and he says that as if it was a dream but more like a delirium, the shilling that was on the table next to him began to talk to him and started to give him an account of it's life and adventures. The shilling begins to tell him that he was born on the side of a mountain, near a village called Peru. When the shilling says it made a voyage to England in an ingot, it means in an mass of metal, such as a block or bar, because that's what ingot means. The shilling then goes on to say that it was brought to England under the convoy of Sir Francis Drake. Sir Francis Drake was a English sailor who led the fight for England against Spain in the Spanish Armada, he was known to many foreigners as an English pirate (especially to the Spanish). At this point I find it very funny that the shilling has the knowledge to know who Sir Francis Drake is and furthermore it's even more amusing that the shilling knew where it came from and also knew that the country it was brought to was England. If this essay was written today, I could imagine it to be like an episode of American Dad, because the way the shilling is made out to be anthropomorphic, reminds me of  Klaus (the Fish) and Roger (the Alien) in American Dad. American Dad is very good at giving it's characters human characteristics when they shouldn't have, just like Addison does with his shilling.
When the shilling says "taken out of my natural habit, refined, naturalised, and put into British mode, with the queens face on one side, and the arms of the country on the other", I'm not sure if it means it actually came from India because to my knowledge I don't think Sir Francis Drake visited India. However I know that Sir Francis Drake visited the Americas, so the shilling could have meant he came from a native Indian habit.

When the shilling Finally gets put into circulation in England, it says "the people very much favoured my natural disposition and shifted me so fast from hand to hand, that before I was five years old, I had travelled into almost every corner of the nation". From this quote, you can begin to imagine how quickly the shilling travelled around the country. We are then told by the shilling about a time when he was imprisoned in an iron chest by a miserable old fellow, with hundreds more of his kind. To the reader we could imagine this as the old man is either collecting or saving shillings, but to the shilling, it's imprisonment. What I found amusing about this, was that it's funny how Addison makes the shilling out to be very knowledgeable for the most part, but in this situation he makes the shilling seem not so smart because it doesn't realise what is happening to it for the first time in it's life. The shilling then says "we heard somebody knocking at our chest, and breaking it open with a hammer". This would suggest that the money in the chest was being stolen.
Once the shilling had been broken out of the chest it tells us "the apothecary gave me to an herb-woman, the herb-woman to a butcher, the butcher to a brewer, and the brewer to his wife, who made a present of me to a nonconformist preacher. This shows how quickly money can be moved around in one day, and it suggests that the shilling ended up in a collection plate of some sort, because it said it was given to a preacher. The shilling also tells us about another account when it was 'arrested' by a superstitious old lady and put away in a greasy purse. Again, this suggests that whenever the shilling is put away for a long period of time, it thinks that it is being imprisoned. We are then under the impression that the shilling was used to bribe or lure soldiers into fighting for parliament in the English civil war, because the shilling says "I was employed in raising soldiers against the king: for being of a very tempting breadth, a sergeant made use of me to inveigle country fellows, and list them in  service of parliament".

The shilling was then lost again for some years as it tells the story of a young man gaining possession of it, due to his deceased father leaving him money instead of leaving him his Estate. So for that reason, the son got really mad and threw the shilling at a wall where it got stuck for a few years until a cavalier discovered it again.
The shilling finally retired, being made into a counter with more of it's kind. I could imagine, at this point the coin was so old that it had probably been taken out of circulation as was probably more seen as a collectors item. Lastly the shilling says " when I fell into the hands of an artist, who conveyed me underground, and with an unmerciful pair of shears, cut off my titles, clipped my brims, retrenched my shape, rubbed me to my inmost ring, and, in short, so spoiled and pillaged me, that he did not leave me worth a groat. This suggests that the shilling had been changed into something else, I'm not sure what exactly, but my guess is that it was made into a new coin, although I'm not sure.
Overall I think that this essay by Addison was great fun to read and was very smartly written. It made me start to think where my money had been before I had it and im sure it made a lot of people think the same. I think that if this was to be written today, it would still be as an effective and interesting peice to read as it was in the time it was first published. I think it would probably be even more interesting now, because people do more with their money now then they ever have done before, so therefore the coin would have more stories to tell. I also thought it was extremley clever how through the adventures of the shilling, Addison gave us examples of all the different ways money could be used, not just the standard way which would be just using it to buy things. This essay also allows  you to use your imagination to think about what could have been the outcome in the different adventures that the shilling had throughout the essay, I came to my own conclusions, as you can tell from reading this but i wonder if anyone else had different ones than I did?

Lecture notes on Liberal empiricism

• Sextus Empiricus said that thinking was pointless, he thought that everything you can think of has a counter argument or question. E.g. ' I think therefore I am' could counter into 'I am therefore I think'.
• Puritans lost the civil war and fled to America. They are very messianic and believe that the world is going to end. In fact when they were losing the civil war, many thought that it was part of the book of revelations and that it was the beginning of the apocalypse and that the world was going to end. They currently have influence over the U.S government. most live in Massachusetts and they also believe that the devil runs the world.
• The first Europeans to settle in the Americas were the Spanish. They went to south America and brought back gold to Europe. That's why most countries in the central Americas speak Spanish. E.g. Columbia, Ecuador and Costa Rica.
• The Dutch allowed anyone to publish anything they wanted in Holland. That's why most philosophers spent time in Holland because they were allowed to publish their books there. E.g. Descartes, Spinoza and Leibniz.
• New York used to be called New Amsterdam because the Dutch founded New York. But eventually England became a more dominant nation than Holland and changed It's name to the New York as we know it as today.
• Adam Smith and the hidden hand of the market. He believed that the reason why one country would be richer than another was because the richer country traded with other countries whereas poorer countries didn't. Which effectively didn't allow their economies to grow. This is why China used to be a poor country, because they refused to trade with other countries.
• Hume quote ' ought from an is'
• Hume on causation- If you see a red ball hit a white ball, then the white ball moves, we think that the red ball caused the white ball to move. But Hume thinks that there is no proof that the red ball caused the white ball to move. It is only our mind that makes the assumption that it was the red ball that caused the white ball to move.
• Hume was an empiricist who believed in synthetic and analytic distinction. Synthetic distinction is when you build up an idea or ideas of something from something you have already seen. E.g. we see a bird and a human , then we put them together to make an angel. Another example would be to think of a fish then think of a human, which would make a Mermaid. Analytic distinction is when you strip an idea or a thought down instead of building it up like you would do with synthetic distinction.
• Hume also believed in induction, which basically means when you keep on adding more to the knowledge and ideas you already have.
• The triangle trade was when ships from the docks of cities such as Liverpool, Bristol and Glasgow, would travel to Africa to collect slaves. They would then bring them to north America in exchange fro Tobacco and Cotton, then bring the Tobacco and Cotton back to Britain. Then just continually preform this triangle. This was also known as the transatlantic trade.
• The funny thing about the dutch was that when they allowed anything to be published in their country, the only rule was that it couldn't be published in Dutch. So the books could be read in any other language, apart from the language of the country that it was published in.
• The Dutch and the British fought against the Spanish for control over the waters. The British had no British flag on their ships so they couldn't be accused for fighting for their country. The only flag they had on their ships were ones with a skull with two bones made in a cross on it. this was known as a form of English Piracy.

Socrates

• Socrates seems to be one of the earliest Philosophers of importance. He was tried, sentenced to death & executed in 399 B.C in Athens. He was about 70 years old.
• Two of his main pupils who he taught where Xenophon and Plato. we only know what we know about Socrates because of these two pupils. Although most of the time, they both had completely different things to say about him. Plato especially wrote volumes about Socrates, as he had a big influence over Plato. Some people say the Plato could of even invented Socrates because Plato made him out to be an extraordinarily interesting character. It is thought that Socrates taught his findings to others, but he never asked for money, so he was never paid through teaching. 
• The reason why Socrates was prosecuted was because he was thought to be 'an evil-doer and a curious person, searching into things under the earth and above the heavens; and making the worse appear a better cause, teaching all this to others'. He was mainly accused of corrupting the youths of Athens.
• At his trial Socrates was found guilty by the majority and because of Athenian law, it was open to him to propose a lesser penalty than death, then the judge was choose which one was fairer between the one that was going to be given to him or the one that he had proposed. The penalty that Socrates suggested was to pay a fine of thirty Minae, for which some of his friends (including Plato) were willing to help pay. But the Judge was so offended & annoyed by the penalty that Socrates offered,  that he was sentenced to death. Socrates accused his prosecutors of making him out to be Eloquence (Persuasive or forcible), but he said that the only Eloquence of which he is capable, he says, is that of truth. Towards the end of his trial Socrates points out that good men are better to live among than bad men, therefore he cannot be so foolish as to corrupt his fellow citizens intentionally; but if unintentionally, then Meletus (who was one of or the judge) should instruct him, not prosecute him. To me that sounds like a fair point, because he is already seen as a bad man who did what he did intentionally, his point would have probably been dismissed. He was also accused by Meletus as being an atheist, because he thought Socrates introduced Gods of his own.
• It is thought that Socrates believed that the best way to gain knowledge was to do so by gaining it through asking others questions. So he often spent his days talking to a lot of people and asking them questions. It seems to me that many people found Socrates very annoying because he often asked questions that the person he was talking to could not answer, which often made them look stupid. In Russell's book he quotes ' He then went to the poets, and asked them to explain passages in their writings, but they were unable to do so. 'Then i knew that not by wisdom do poets write poetry, but by a sort of genius and inspiration.' To me this is an example of him making other people look stupid. Because if I was asked a question about my profession & I didn't know the answer, I know i would feel embarrassed and stupid.  

Socrates

• Socrates believed that God only is wise, and by his answer he intends to prove that the wisdom that man holds means little to nothing. He also believes that the reason why he is wiser than everyone else is because he thinks that people think they know things, when really they don't, which doesn't make them wise. But the difference between them and him is that he knows he knows nothing, which makes him wiser and smarter than most.
• Socrates says that young men of the richer class have nothing better to do so they spend time watching him expose people, which make him a lot of enemies. But he says that they themselves do not like to admit that their pretence of knowledge has been detected.
• Before Socrates became a Philosopher, he was a soldier. he believed that God had instructed him to leave his old post as a soldier and take up his new post as a philosopher to go on a mission of searching into himself and other men. No one knew if Socrates actually believed that he was literally hearing voices from a divine being or if he just thought that God would want him to do these things.
• He thought that in Politics, no honest man could live long. He thought this because, at the time, politics were so corrupt that it would be impossible to be a politician and tell the truth all of the time.
• He was also known to be a strange man, some even thought that he was crazy, because whenever he couldn't figure something out, he would get lost in thought and just stop and stand where ever it was that he had got lost in thought, until he had figured out whatever it was that he was thinking about. In Russell's book he mentioned a time when two men made up a bed outside and watched him stand in the same place all night, in deep thought, until the next morning, without even moving or anything. There was also another time when he was attending a dinner party with one of his friends, when he stopped in the corridor and just stood there until the dinner party was almost over. When his friend realised that he was gone, he sent a slave to go and find him, once the slave had found him, Socrates was in such deep thought that he didn't even acknowledge the existence of the slave.
• Socrates was known to be a really ugly man with a snub nose (which you can tell from my picture). It was said that his endurance was fantastic and that one time when he was a soldier, he was seen with his fellow service men in the winter, with very few clothes on, on the ice and with barefoot, whilst his couterparts were wrapped up in many layers of clothes. It was said that he had a complete mastery of soul over body, because he had control over all bodily passion. It was said that when he drank wine no one could out drink him, but no one had ever seen him drunk and in love, he would never give in, even to the strongest of temptations.
• It is thought that Socrates believed in life after death. Just before he was executed, he said that in the next world he could go on and ask question forever, and could not be put to death, as then he would be immortal.

Why Is The 19th Century Described As “The Age Of Change”

The reason why the 19^th century can be described as “ the age of change “ is because the modern world and most importantly modern Britain and Europe, began to take shape in the 19^th century. Politically the changes could be seen across the pond in France, because of the French revolution, whilst most of the industrial changes were being made here in Britain. During the Napoleonic wars, Britain became dominant and powerful by sea. This was through there naval forces. The Navy took control of the waterways, which gave them the opportunity to block the ports to France, so that the French couldn’t export anything, which became a huge problem for the French as it caused a crash in their markets. Britain took this as an opportunity to step in and begin trading with other countries such as America, South America, India and the Far East, amongst others. It was at this point that the British Empire really started and became dominant throughout the world. Britain was growing rapidly, whilst other European countries suffered and struggled around the time of the Napoleonic war.

New markets began to rise, this was on the back of a something they called the trans Atlantic triangular trade. Which was the transporting of slave that were taken from Africa and brought to the south of America to pick Cotton. That cotton was then taken to growing Cities throughout England such as Liverpool, Manchester, Bristol and also London. Once the cotton had reached these cities, it was used to make clothes, which was then shipped back to Africa, Where the cycle would start all over again.

There was also political change going on in Britain to, as Scotland became part of the union and in 1801 Ireland became part of it to, which then came to form the United Kingdom.

During this 19th century the major cities in England such as London and Manchester, began to grow quite rapidly. This was because the Farmers and families from the country side were forced to give up their fields and land as all the new heavy machinery where brought in to do the same jobs that the farmers could do, but the machine were able to do it on a larger scale and also a lot quicker than the Farmers were able to do it. This effectively drove the Farmers out, so for those reason the farmers barley made enough money to live on, forcing them into the cities to find work.

Places such as Manchester and London grew almost over night, with the population going from around 1500 to 150’000. This made the cities way to overcrowded, furthermore they became terribly polluted. Charles Dickens spoke about one side of this situation, that being urbanisation, whilst William Cobbett looked at the other side of this, which was how the countryside was affected by Industrialisation and the Industrial revolution on a whole. First we shall briefly look at the latter of the two men and see what Cobbett’s views and opinions were on this “ age of change “. Cobbett was a political journalist in the mid to late 19^th century. He grew up in the countryside of Farnham, surrey, so he was very passionate about farming and he was scared that the rapid growth of industrialisation would ruin the countryside and the farming culture. It was known that Cobbett hated London, because he thought that Londoners got paid for doing nothing and got fed by the sweat of rural labourers through taxes. His views of industrialisation were made most public through his book called Rural Rides. On the other hand Charles Dickens wrote books focusing mostly on situations that would be happening in the densely populated cities throughout the 19^th century, but mostly in London, because Dickens moved to London in 1822 from Portsmouth. You could argue that his books mostly focused on the poverty that the people in these cities had to face. Books that were written by Dickens such as Great Expectations, Hard Times and the more well known Oliver Twist, are all sort of similar as they all show two sides of these cities in the industrial revolution period. One side being the poor side, through characters such as Pip, Oliver Twist and Sissy and the other being the more wealthy through characters such as Miss Havisham, Mr. Thomas Gradgrind and Mr Brownlow. You could suggest that the stories that Dickens tells in his books of the Hardship that the poor go through are just a reflection of his own childhood, as he came to London as a poor boy and also his father did spend some time in prison when Dickens was a boy.

Others that contributed to making this period  “ The age of change “ were John Stewart Mill and Charles Darwin. Mill was best known for his ideas on Utilitarianism and Liberty. He received his ideas on utilitarianism from his mentor Jeremy Bentham, but he developed on these ideas and made his own slightly more complex ones because he disagreed on parts of Benthams initial ones. Utilitarianism in its simplest form means when a person wants to maximise pleasure and minimise pain. Mill believed that there were different levels of happiness E.G. It would be better to be a unhappy wealthy man than it would be to be a happy poor man. You could also argue that Mill’s views on happiness are a bit vague and simplistic because he would be against someone going through hardships and pain to reach there eventual goal that would bring them happiness.

Mill’s views on liberty were he believed in individual freedom and that people should have the right to do whatever they wanted to do, as long as they weren’t affecting anyone else with their actions. He also thought that there was no difference between a man and a woman, so he thought that women should be able to vote just like men. He also believed in freedom of speech and that everybody should be entitled to there own opinion.

Lastly, Charles Darwin was very influential in the 19^th century because of his views mainly on evolution. From travelling and seeing fossils, Darwin believed that humans evolved and that there was no Adam and Eve like the bible suggests. He believed that groups of organisms undergo genetic change over a long period of time through the process known as natural selection. He also came up with the theory that members of the same species compete for survival and that the one who adapt best to the environment have the best chance to survive. He called this survival of the fittest.

Given all that had taken place in the 19^th century, along with all the influential and opinionated minds that lived through this period of time, it’s not hard to see why this era was labelled “ The age of change “.

Willaim Cobbett & Rural Rides

• William Cobbett was a political Journalist in the early to mid 19th century.
• He was writing and living in the times when Britain (mainly England) was changing dramatically, due to the Industrial revolution. new cities and towns where popping up all over the  country.
• William Cobbett grew up in the country side in Farnham surrey.
• He grew up in a farming family and from a young age he was a farmer. He was very passionate about farming and he was scarred that the rapid growth of industrialisation would ruin the country side and the farming culture.
• He was born in 1763 and had to older brothers
• In 1784 he joined the army and spent time in America. Once he returned to England from the army, he had found out the wages had almost halved.
• Cobbett had some weird views on Potatoes, he believed that they were unfit for human consumption.




William Cobbett


• He despised the government for taxes that ruined Farmers and fed the lazy, he had no time for the church and thought that the Army were freeloaders.
• He also hated London, he thought that Londoners got payed for doing nothing and got fed by the sweat of rural laborers. He also thought London was unhealthy.
• He loved Pigs and he believed that Pigs were the animal of the working class because he believed that if you had Pigs, you couldn't starve.
• In the later years of his life, Cobbett joined parliament.
• He liked machines, because he believed it showed the growth of man, but also believed that the machines and the industrial revolution on a whole would take the farmers and rural workers away from the country side and to the city to work in factories. This is what he was against.
• Check out the videos below as I found it helpfull for me to understand William Cobbett's radical Journalism.