Skip to main content

Posts

My laptop has died. How do I choose a new one?

My laptop and I have enjoyed a tempestuous relationship for the last few years. Initially a company reject, I was delighted to pick up the pieces of the thoroughly unremarkable HP Compaq 6515b. As a company machine my first duty was to remove the software which was not licensed for private use, and the easiest way to do this was simply to replace the limited 60gb hard drive with a decent 320gb drive and a fresh install of Linux Ubuntu (of which , more later). Unfortunately, Ubuntu and my laptop did not see eye to eye on many issues.  The fan broke within months while the budget AMD processor was initially slow and over the years progressed to being glacial.  By far the most problematic issue was the use of wireless. The inbuilt Broadcom wireless card refused to speak to anything not owned by Microsoft, so for three years working online has been a never-ending wrestling match involving re-installing drivers and threatening the wretched machine with a 15ft drop from the neares...

Theories of Description

So. Picture yourself on a rainy, gloomy Thursday, looking forward to the prospect of delivering a two-hour lecture on Bertrand Russell's theories of description . Can you feel my pain? The difficulty here is that the purpose of this class is not to develop a deep and comprehensive understanding of the various theories which surround Russell's idea (this is quite possibly something which should reasonably expected of any sane person), but to introduce just enough to provide a working definition (if you will excuse the philosophical paradox) of the theory which to a large extent determined the shape and style of philosophical approaches to language throughout the twentieth century, and on to the present day. This presentation was designed to follow on from an initial review of the problems with referential language . Anyway, here we go:

Re. 'Are we just meat in the room?'

I have just read yet another very interesting blog from @PlashingVole (hereafter referred to as PV, which I hope he does not mind) about the issue of attendance at lectures (read the article here: http://plashingvole.blogspot.com.au/2012/04/are-we-just-meat-in-room.html ).  I started to write a comment back for it, but it got so long-winded I thought I would blog my response instead. I imagine most places are struggling with this same issue.  PV makes an excellent point about the fact that students do not necessarily recognize the benefit of a course when they feel forced to do it.  We deliver compulsory Study Skills courses on the degrees at NUC which often incur a wide-spread (even aggressive) resentment from students.  Common responses are: ‘Why am I being told how to structure a sentence?’; ‘I have three A-levels, so I already know how to write an essay!’; ‘I hate maths, so why am I having to study quantitative research methods?’; ‘I came to study Englis...

Problems with referential theories of language

Yesterday I begun the unenviable task of trying to explain twentieth century philosophies of language to a group of students who had really done nothing to deserve it.  As a build-up to the inevitable headaches which Bertrand Russell is going to create next week I thought I would begin with a line or argument explaining the problems caused by referential theories of meaning, and the consequent need for a new model to explain language. Anyway, here is my presentation.  Does it make any sense to anyone?

Can we still use imagination to study literature?

I have come to the conclusion that nothing does more to discourage the use of the imagination than being an English academic.  It really is all rather depressing.  My life seems to be dedicated to finding new ways of either quantifying or negating the disciplinary distinctiveness of the study of literature in the face of fixed prejudices about its value.   Interestingly enough, some of the most hysterical voices calling for the elimination of the arts and humanities in Universities are those who have themselves made themselves a nicely lucrative living from them: Philosopher Alain de Botton arguing on the BBC’s Daily Politics show that the humanities (including Philosophy) should not be taught in Universities because they are not “utilitarian” enough, or the deliciously loony poet V.S. Naipaul arguing that Universities should only interest themselves in "measurable truth" . In writing about the general uselessness of the Humanities for the Wall Street Journal ...

Is technology good for my studies, part 1: Smartphones

It may seem rather strange to be asking this question in a blog, because the very fact that I am blogging at all suggests that I may be a convert to the cult of technology.  Mind you, if you are reading this blog then you probably are too, so perhaps it all evens out in the end. The problem is that there are so many conflicting messages about using technology for study. Depending on what you read you may be either paranoid that you are not taking full advantage of the range of sophisticated tools for research which are available, or paranoid that by using them you are pretty much ensuring that you will fail your degree because of either weak sources or plagiary - possibly both. So, I thought it might be useful to take some time to explore the potential, and the potential pitfalls, of relying on technology to help you through your studies.  To begin with, I am going to look at an aspect of technology in studies which appears to be sneaking in by the backdoor, and si...

Is 'Literature' the same thing as 'Culture'?

Why is literature worth studying?  What is the point?  If a play was written by a glove-makers son in Stratford back in the late 16th century, what makes it worth reading today? These are questions tend to get a lot of focus at the beginning of an English degree, and which are frequently vocalised in derisory tones in any discussions about the future of Higher Education.  Those of you who have done an English degree might be able to cast your minds back all the way to your first year(oh, the good old days of youth and innocence!), and may find niggling away in some cognitive corner a recollection of the critic F. R. Leavis, whose view on this issue was dominant for some time.  He, together with the new wave of critics re-vitalising the study of literature in the early twentieth century, set out a clear set of values which students of literature should be interested in: Its importance in human society for the sustenance of civilisation Th...