Exam Topics

So another semester has flown by with alarming haste and the exam awaits...

The format for the exam is the same as the previous semesters, with five questions relating to topics previously discussed in lectures. The first question asks 'was Neitzsche a Nazi?'

In short, the answer this is no. Fredrich Neitzsche has often been referred to as a nazi because of similarity of themes expressed in his works, such as Thus Spake Zarathustra. Nietzsche is most famous for his expression that 'God is dead'. He asserts that there is no individual God figure in the Judeo-Christian religion. He hated this religion, stating it was something not to be tolerated and must be eradicated in order for people to become free. He said it was the religion of slaves. These religions hated his views and tar him with the brush of causing Nazi ideas. His anti-semetism is often mistaken as a racial idea, as with the Nazis, but racism cannot be attributed to Nietzsche. Unlike the Nazis, it is the collectivism of the religion he despises, not the individuals.

The two ideas that are associated with Nietasche and the Nazi regime are:

• The concept of the will to power.
• The 'overman'.
  

The idea of the will to power has been associated with Hitler. A person with a great intent of will power, with the power to move history. In his book Thus Spake Zarathustra, Nietzsche presents his great belief in the idea of the 'ubermensch' (the overman'). The Nazi's claimed this idea as their own and presented Hitler in this way, conveying him as superior with the will to power. Neitasche doesn't treat this theory in racial terms. For example, he would view a disabled person overcoming their difficulties to win a paralympic gold medal as an 'overman'. The Nazis however hated those with disabilities and labled them 'undermen'. Nietzsche was an extreme individualist which does not coincide with Nazi philosophy. Therefore Neitzsche has been unfairly dubbed a Nazi when he most certainly was not one.

The second question asks whether Meursault was a bad man?

Meursault is the hero of Albert Camus existentialist novel The Stranger or The Outsider. The novel deals with existential concerns with choice. In the book Meursault is experiencing an existential void and through boredom simply murders an Algerian man without motive. Meursault is put on trial but simply does not care. It becomes clear that the predominately white justice system are keen to let him off as long as he says he was sorry and didnt mean and was upset about his mothers death. But Meursault does not care. He refuses to conform with the justice system. He is a bad man because he is convicted of a crime. He is also a bad man in the conventional sense as far as the jury are concerned. Meursault is bad in the sense that he is unconventional and refuses to go along with the social norms. As a result he is sentenced to death.

However, Meursault is an existential hero becauses he refuses to adapt his momentary consciouness to social convention. He lives by the existentialist slogan that existence precedes essance, where the act of living is to constantly confront moral decisions as they occur. You can't rely on moral frameworks. Camus explores this notion through the question of collaboration. So in the eyes of existentialists Meursault is not a bad man, he is a hero.

The third questions looks at the New Journalism. It asks, 'To what extent does the New Journalism (Tom Wolfe) reflect cultural and intellectual friends such as psychoanalysis and the politics of the 'me generation'?

Tom Wolfe created the concept of 'new journalism', which is journalism in the style of 19th century realist non-fiction novel. Wolfe writes in the conventions of 19th century realists writers like Charles Dickens and Emile Zola. New Journalism sees the move from digetic to mimetic storytelling, from telling to seeing. Everything detail is strange and appealing in new journalism. The strangest things are the things that are officially normal. Throughout this movement existentialism becomes the normal style in society and writing. The fact we don't tell in the New Journalism conveys the cultural trend of psychoanalysis, where the concept is seeing and listening. The task is to find the real in the apparent insignificant detail. New Journalism finds out the 'real' not just the story.

The New Journalism reflects the 'me generation'. This movement is all about individualism. Everyone should be happy and its all about self fulfillment, sexual liberty and pleasure. If it feels good then just do it, be it drugs or sexual deviance. Wilhelm Reich stated that you will become ill if you do not have sexual liberation. This 'me generation' resulted in the new agenda of personal issues.

The fourth question concerned itself with the Vienna Circle and asked the question, 'Why might journalists find the logical positivist school of philosophy to be useful and appealing. What faults have been identified in the approach of the logical positivists?

The Logical Positivists rejected all philosophy and metaphysics. The only thing they believe is science, which they view as everything. The key concept of this school of thought is the verification principle. This is the theory that knowledge is based on verification. The only thing that counts is whether a statement can be independently verified. If something cannot be verified then they simply ignore it as there will never be a scientific answer. For example, Nietzsche famously said that God is dead. The logical positivists would assert that this statement cannot be verified. The case is the same for Freud's theories, they are all metaphysics that cannot be verified as true or false. This is useful for journalists as it reflects the common practice of journalism highlighting comment and fact. In journalism any facts need to verifiable in order for them to be published.

Karl Popper found a fault in logical positivists verification principle. He discredited the theory with his falsification principle. This stated that the verification principle itself cannot be verified. With this theory he destroyed the logical positivists.

I found the fifth and final question the most difficult out of all of them. 'Keynes has been hailed as both the saviour and the destroyer of the capitalist system. Why?'

In his book 'General Theory' Keynes rejects all economic theory of his time, which was the idea of the free market. In the free market the government gives the unemployed benefits which results in them not bothering going back to work, but living off these state benefits. Keynes said that the more you cut wages and government spending you will eradicate unemployment. He urges the government to pay the unemployed to work, even if its just digging holes and filling them up again. They will earn a wage and then spend it. This is the multiplier affect, which creates a circle of economy flowing. The government should spend money, even if they don't have it. According to some people this principle saved capitalism.

However, the printing of money that the government does not have to spend creates huge inflation which can be seen to destroy the moral of society and thus Keynes can also been seen as the destroyer of capitalism.

The New Journalism

"I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone. But they've always worked for me." - Hunter S. Thompson.

New Journalism, or 'Gonzo' Journalism is a style of writing and journalism founded in the 1960s/70s. During this period there is a generational change in popular culture in the USA. This change is realised in journalism with the shift to the literary movement of The New Journalism. The main point of this new form is the shift in form of narrtation from digetic to mimetic. 'Seeing' became the new 'telling' and objectivity is neglected in favour of subject experience. The movement was shaped by the two key figures of Hunter S. Thompson and Tom Wolfe, both of whom were influenced by the culture of drug taking at the time. For instance, Thompson's most well-known work Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas details an LSD fuelled trip to Las Vegas.

Gonzo Journalism has made the jump from paper to television with a large degree of success. This is mainly due to the fact it is ultimately 'performance journalism', where entertaining is of more importance than informing. Documentaries such as Super Size Me have appeared baring the forms and conventions of gonzo journalism, placing more focus on the journalist and his/her experiences rather than objective reporting.

Wilhelm Reich

In short, Wilhelm Reich believed that orgasms = happiness. Who am I to argue against this theory!?

Reich was a psychiatrist and psychoanalyst working in the 20th century. He was a contemporary of Freud and like the Freud discussed the issue of primitive urges within humans. Where Freud believed primitive sexual and aggressive forces were present in the human sub-conscious and would lead to chaos if they weren't suppressed and controlled. Reich proposed revolutionary ideas of Freud. He believed the complete opposite of Freud's theory, stating that the unconscious forces inside the mind were a good thing and it was societies suppression that destroyed them and made them dangerous. Reich detailed that the underlying energy was sexuality and if this was released then humankind would flourish.

Reich argued that Freud had completely ignored the human body, focusing simply on the mind which as a result ignored some important issues. Where Freud viewed sexual impulses as dangerous Reich claimed that sexual desire and pleasures were the essential key to happiness. Sexual repression was the real danger that led to damaging consequences. Reich's theory paid close attention to the act of orgasm.

I can imagine the majority of people willing to side with Mr Reich on this particular issue!

Reich believed there were three layers to the human mind, a similar idea to Freud's concept of the ego, superego and id. These layers were as followed:

• The surface level, which is our everyday social form conveying politeness, compassion, and responsibility.
  
• The second layer is a cruel, sadistic, rapacious one. In Freudian terms it is the 'unconscious' or 'what is being repressed'.
• The third deepest layer is the biological core, conveying honesty, love, and rational hatred.

Reich paid particular attention to second layer in his book The Mass Psychology of Facism where he set out to explain why so many people supported the Nazis in Germany. He focused on the lower middle classes and stated their support for the Nazis was due to the strong paternal authority figure of their father which led to a love of authority and rebellion. He also suggested that any child who experienced sexual repression and an authoritarian social order would become submissive and thus more likely to submit to supporting the Nazis. The lower middle class were ultimately targeted because of their vulnerability.

Reich's ideas are still relevant in today's society. He stressed that one shouldn't wait to marry to have sex, that you should exercise sexual freedom. This notion is clearly present today, where the majority do not wait til marriage to engage in sexual intercourse. A quick look at the Sunday tabloids portrays a society that is sexual obsessed not repressed. Here are a few of Sunday 2 May's headlines:

Boxing Hero Amir Khan Sends Naked Snaps and Twisted Sex texts

Rihanna And the Sex Toy

Abbey's centre back and silky smooth forward shows why she took Peter's Clancy

The above stories are all sex obsessed, conveying society's sexual freedom and want for sexual content. Reich would be pleased with this notion.

Reich's key idea was to simply 'let it out!' I experienced this notion recently at my dog's puppy class. The dog trainer said we were to obtain a rag toy attached to a lengthy piece of rope and give it to the dog. She said the idea behind this was for the dog to let its aggression and anger out on the toy. This conveys Reich's idea that it is better out than in.

So people remember; be free! Sexual liberty is the ultimate freedom!