Sunday, 20 September 2015

Theme 2: Post seminar

Just like last week I feel that I have a much better understanding of what the theme really is about after going to the lecture and discuss the questions during the seminar.

Nominalism is a way to think about objects. It questions the idea of categorising objects in to pens, bottles and so on. Instead the focus lies on the properties and particularities of the object. For example a pen is an object that you can write with and the only thing that is real is the individual pen. It might be better to look at the properties of an object to understand it and not get lost in abstractness.

While nominalism at first sounds like a very logical and useful way of thinking, Adorno and Horkheimer are critical of it. If we only observe properties and objects that exists we can not question it, which means that we are slaves to it. In Italian fascism people believed that some people are born poor and some rich, that’s just the law of nature. If everything repeats, like nominalism is arguing, the working class will always be poor and the rich will always be rich. In order for us to have human rights we need a concept to strive for a better world and not just observe that there are people that starve, get abused and so on without thinking more about it because that’s just the way it is.

An example from the seminar was that, in film, secretaries were portrayed very traditionally. It’s a woman with a male boss. According to Adorno and Horkheimer this would only enforce the old values and take the edge of the growing frustration which does not lead to any changes. Benjamin is more positive and thinks there is a potential revolution in this. Thanks to industrial mass producing that removes the aura and the uniqueness from art and makes it available for the masses.

During the seminar we also talked about Platonic realism and used plato’s cave as an illustration for what it is. Basically what it says is that there is a, for example, perfect and original chair and all the other chairs that we see are shadows of that one. In nominalism every object is unique and is how we see it, in realism the object is part of its concept. When we observe the world it is important, like I stated earlier, to be able to see a different future and reality in order to make the world a better place. Therefore we can not only see the world and accept it like it is, we need to conceptualise what we see in order to think freely.

9 comments:

  1. Thank you for the explanations! I was having trouble understanding why Adorno and Horkheimer were critical of nominalism, as it was mentioned in the seminar that it could be compared to non-binary genders. In other words, that we shouldn't see people as either male or female, but that there are genders in between that people rather identify as, which I think sounds great really :P But I guess there is a balance required in everything. It would be interesting to hear more about what you think personally about the theme!

    ReplyDelete
  2. nice explanation on nominalism linking it to kant's categories from previous week. after two weeks i kinda get the link between them as i read your post :) i was having some confusion understanding the realism concept. your blogs help me a bit. but doesn't it sounds like realism and kants was having the same thing which is like what you mention that 'object is part of its concept. anyways great post , keep it up :)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Good to see that you feel that you got a better understanding of the topic from the lectures and seminars! It is something that seems to be a trend among many of the students including myself since I think this weeks theme was quite a challenge to get an understanding of. I like the way that you connect to the course literature and talk about the authors different views and meanings that they are trying to put into words. It would be interesting to see more of your own reflections on the terms as well and some elaboration on the challenges of this week. :)

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think your reflection really captured what we have talked about in seminars and what has been presented during the lecture. I like your explanation of why Adorno & Horkheimer thought of nominalism as something that could be used in a negative manner in movies. I also like that you have written a clear distinction of how Adorno & Horkheimer think that media can affect people versus how Benjamin think that media could affect people.
    I think that you have understood the terms we have discussed and I think that your last part was very interesting, and would have liked to read more and maybe have gotten some examples of what you mean by us thinking freely by conceptualising what we see.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hi!
    I agree with you that there are basically two sides to the concept of nominalism. The notion of not categorizing objects is positive in the sense that one doesn’t fall into prejudice but rather judge each object individually. However, as Adorno and Horkheimer state, it can also be related to fascism since the concept doesn’t leave it open for things to change - things are always as they’ve always been and always will be. Furthermore, you provide great explanations to the different concepts in your two posts on the theme, and it certainly seems like you’ve grasped the theme’s different concepts. Keep up the great work!

    ReplyDelete
  6. I enjoyed your essay and very appreciate that you can combine the explanation of "Nominalism" with history. Through your tatement of history of Italian fascism,I knew the disadvantage of taking verything for granted without thingking.Platonic realism is a very abstract concept for me and difficult to understand. You explained well on it and I can understand what we perceive nowadays is the reflection of the object in thei deal world.
    Keep it up.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I enjoyed your essay and very appreciate that you can combine the explanation of "Nominalism" with history. Through your tatement of history of Italian fascism,I knew the disadvantage of taking verything for granted without thingking.Platonic realism is a very abstract concept for me and difficult to understand. You explained well on it and I can understand what we perceive nowadays is the reflection of the object in thei deal world.
    Keep it up.

    ReplyDelete
  8. 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!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hi!
    Really good and well structured reflection! You really managed to point out the key concepts of this theme. Your blogposts explains A&H thought of nominalism really good! I understood just as you did and felt that you managed to explain in a really easy way to understand!

    ReplyDelete