After the seminar of this theme2, I think I extend my view, at beginning, I think I even understand the question in a very narrow way, so most of my answer is not very same as others, but after the seminar, everything become clear.
From the seminar I know the difference between Nominalism and Realism, concept are real is realism, concept is not real which is just name is Nominalism. And the example is for the Nominalism, A chair is just chair, it’s only that chair, nothing else, it can not change. For realism, a chair is something can be square or round or any shape. Nominalism is more specific, realism is more general.
And I also learned Nominalism is negative, it means things can not be changed, Chair is Chair, poor people are poor, rich people are rich, it's actual will change in the future, then it doesn't match Nominalism.
Also, for the substructure and superstructure change which is culture and art in Benjamin’s concept, substructure will influence people’s life every day, but superstructure things which are spirit food may not influence so obviously. But it still have a strong impact to people’s thinking way, it might change the perception of future for people.
"Auro" which is a kernel view in Benjamin’s article, through the seminar I got more deep understand of this "Auro" word. Benjamin thinks aura only refer to few people who can have this object. Print the "Auro" art will destroy the "Auro" of the original work of art. But via the media way, for example, we can print it, then everybody can have their own "Auro" work of art, we can spread the work of art. In this way, Media maybe the good thing.
Hej,
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing the examples for nominalism/realism and the sub/superstructure again. What were your personal thoughts about these?
And, just for the future, it's "aura", just so you know it :-)
I think you got a good grasp of the concepts from this theme and summed them up nicely. I wouldn't however agree that nominalism is simply negative. We discussed some aspects of nominalism and how they're negative in some senses according to some. For example, if you strictly have a nominalist point of view where things just are what they are, you won't be able to perceive structures and abstract concepts that can help you imagining better futures. But on the other hand, I think a nominalist perspective can be needed sometimes, or at least it's positive to be able to understand the nominalist perspective and see how in some way, this chair is just this chair. Sometimes I encounter discussions where it is necessary to break down perceptions and pre-conceived notions and try to see the basic realities of things, in order to then perhaps be able to form new perceptions. An example would be economics. It's a whole system with lots of structures and abstract notions and you have to know these notions in order to get the system and work within it. In a sense, the system really exists, because we all agree it exists. But sometimes it's necessary to realise what money is – it is just an imagined concept of value that we quantify into these numbers. When you break down the structure and think about money as just names, you can then begin to imagine alternate ways to construct economics.
ReplyDeleteGood reflection! You've centered in on key concepts such as 'aura' and 'nominalism' and explained them well in your reflection. It looked like you did not really get a grip on quite q few concepts before the theme so it's very nice to see the difference in your reflection!
ReplyDeleteKeep it up!
Hello. It is ok to not really understand the concepts before the lecture and seminar. A lot of us got the concepts wrong. I think that nominalism per se is not negative but it can have consequences if that is the only way we see the world. I think that it is important that we mix realism with nominalism in order for us to strive for a better future.
ReplyDeleteHi, I was in the same talking group with you and I think what you understand towards the question is pretty innovative and I think there's is no such thing as right or wrong in philosophy we just perceive the question in a different way :) Well I think you did a brief and clear summery of what we talked about during seminar and course , keep up with the good working !
ReplyDeleteHi Chenchen,
ReplyDeleteI think you have learned a lot from theme 2 as you summarized all the key concepts of the theme. It is interesting to approach 'Nominalism' compared with 'Realism'. It is a very good way to study the abstract concept. Also, your reflection is interesting to me and help enhance my understanding of Nominalism. However, I don't think Nominalism is 'negative'. Maybe we can just see it as a metaphysical view in philosophy. Anyway, good job on summary! Thanks for your sharing.