Theme 4: Quantitative Research

The Role of Internet User- Characteristics and Motives in Explaining Three Dimensions of Internet Addiction (Kim and Haridakis, 2009)

Published in: the Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication ( Impact Factor: 1.778)

The researchers examined how users' background characteristics, motives, and the amount of Internet use contribute to Internet addiction. They identified three possible dimensions of internet addiction: intrusion, escaping reality and attachment. The results suggest that motives and users’ background are important potential factors to internet addiction.

The sample included 203 undergraduate students and the study took place in the USA. All participants were required to use internet.

The quantitative methodologies and measurements used in this study were designed based on previous studies, mainly on addiction in substance and media related contents-Internet and television. The participants answered questionnaires with the following measurements: Internet addiction, time spent using Internet, motives for using Internet and their background characteristics-locus of control, participants' self-esteem, shyness, loneliness and sensation-seeking.

The benefits of using these questionnaires with various scales is that the researchers were able to collect quantitative data so that they could test and prove their hypotheses on the role of internet users’ characteristics and motives in internet addiction. Then, hierarchical regression analyses were used to examine the contribution of users' background characteristics, motives, and the amount of Internet use to predicting each of the three dimensions of Internet addiction that was identified: Intrusion, escaping reality, and attachment.

A limitation of the methodologies used is that the findings of this study on college students cannot be generalized, since only one community was examined. Furthermore, the researchers state that Internet evolving use and functions may require more up-to-date measures of variables (Ibid: 1009).   

While these scales and the reasoning for using them, as well as how the quantitative data of this study were worked is thoroughly explained, it is not clearly specified if the participants replied to these questions online or on written papers.

What I learned about quantitative methods from this paper is that no matter how well research methodologies and measurements are designed and even though statistical data are valuable, when they depend on humans living in a specific context, it is difficult to generalize the results. When it comes to social sciences, further research is necessary. Plus, the collected data, their presentation and interpretation depend heavily on the researchers’ agendas and the design of the methodology.

The main methodological problems of this study is that some of these measurements were outdated. More up-to-date measurements might be more appropriate. Furthermore, the results cannot be generalized since only one specific community was examined. If more communities were researched, we might have different data.

Physical activity, stress, and self-reportedupper respiratory tract infection (Fondell et al., 2010)

This paper examines the relationship between physical activity and self-reported upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) and the possible interactive relationship between physical activity, perceived stress and self-reported URTI. The study population was 1509 Swedish men and women aged 20-60. Quantitative data were collected from online questionnaires and follow up questionnaires that lasted 4 months. According to the results high levels of physical activity were associated with a reduced risk of self-reported URTI for both sexes. Additionally, highly stressed men appeared to benefit more from high levels of physical activity than people with lower stress.

The benefits of using quantitative methods is that the researchers can test a hypothesis. If the statistical and quantitative data agree with this hypothesis, the researchers can prove it. If not, the results might lead to something unexpected, to something that was not thought of before; it might lead to the understanding of a gap that could be researched in the future.

On the other hand, statistical data are just data. They do not provide understanding or explanation of something. Analysis and interpretation of the data is necessary. Plus, the design and implementation of a quantitative methodology demands time and effort; many people can be involved in this process. In order to be able to generalize the results, the study population should be large and representative of the general population. This is not an easy task. Generalization is not always possible since the population examined in a specific one, so further research is also necessary. It could be necessary to have follow up periods on even follow up studies.

The benefits of using qualitative methods, such as interviews and focus groups, is that they can provide a deeper and better understanding of something. The group of people examined is strictly specified.

On the other hand, since we are talking about a specific target group, the results might differ if we conduct the survey in another context or in 10 years. Another limitation is that researchers cannot interview a large population. Plus, it might be necessary to test and support with quantitative methodologies the results.    

REFERENCES

Fondell, E., Lagerros, Y. T., Sundberg, C. J., Lekander, M., Bälter, O., Rothman, K., & Bälter, K. (2010). Physical activity, stress, and self-reported upper respiratory tract infection. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 43(2), 272-279.

Kim, J. and Haridakis, P. M. (2009), The Role of Internet User Characteristics and Motives in Explaining Three Dimensions of Internet Addiction. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14: 988–1015. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01478.x

Reflections on Theme 3: Research and theory

During this week we read the articles “The Nature of Theory in Information Systems” (Gregor, 2006) and “What Theory is Not” (Sutton and Staw, 1995). I found Gregor’s taxonomy of theory types really interesting because it included types which were not traditionally seen as theory. According to Gregor, the five theory types in Information Systems Research are: Analysis, Explanation, Prediction, Explanation and Prediction and Design and Action.  

In the first seminar we discussed the journals and the papers that we found interesting. Each group chose to discuss one of the articles, its results, the theory used, the limitations etc. My group discussed the “Channeling Science Information Seekers' Attention? A Content Analysis of Top-Ranked vs. Lower-Ranked Sites in Google” (Li et al., 2013). I found the discussion on the implications of Google as a dominant search engine on the diversity of online science content to be really interesting.

I was troubled by the fact that most-if not all- of the discussed articles had limitations in their methodologies; that results could not be generalized or that they were not clear conclusions. But what I got from this seminar is that even when a theory is considered to have limitations, it can still contribute to the advancement of knowledge. Researchers can learn from this mistake and avoid it in future theories and methodologies .

At the second seminar we discussed different theories and explained which theory type were used in some articles. My group discussed the Theory of Social Capital, according to which individuals can benefit from their networks. According to the results of the paper “The Benefits of Facebook “Friends:” Social Capital and College Students’ Use of Online Social Network Sites” (Ellison et al., 2007), there is a strong association between Facebook usage and the three dimensions of social capital: bridging of social capital, as well as bonding and maintained social capital. We argued that the major theory used in this paper is analysis because the theory provided an analysis of something that was poorly examined beforehand, a description of this phenomenon. We noted that it might also be an explanation theory because this theory explained how and why individuals can benefit by using Facebook, e.g. Facebook connections could pay off in terms of opportunities, such as jobs, internships etc. After the discussions in the second seminar, I could argue that the theory types used in this paper are analysis-mainly- and prediction, because the theory also provided patterns, but it did not have well developed justificatory causal explanations (Gregor, Ibid: 620). As we discussed during the seminars, it is not always easy to categorize a theory.

We also discussed the definition of theory in the course’s Wiki. Theory is a proposition describing and explaining why and how phenomena occur, connections between them. It can also try to explain the causal logic between cause and effect. The focus of the discussion was the theory’s justification and generalization through scientific repetition. My group did not agree with the opinion that when a theory is accepted by a majority of people, it can be regarded as a true belief. We disagreed with the term true belief and that it can be shaped trough the majority of people. We also noted that what is considered to be a true belief today may not be considered as such in 50 years. After all, theories can evolve, be revised.

To conclude, a theory should be scientifically justifiable. It is also important to be accepted by the gatekeepers. Being published in journals with high Impact Factor means that the theory has been through a quality process. 

REFERENCES

Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C. and Lampe, C. (2007), The Benefits of Facebook “Friends:” Social Capital and College Students’ Use of Online Social Network Sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12: 1143–1168. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00367.x

Gregor, S. (2006). The Nature of Theory in Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 30(3), 611-642.

Li, N., Anderson, A., Brossard, D. and Scheufele, D. (2013). Channeling Science Information Seekers' Attention? A Content Analysis of Top-Ranked vs. Lower-Ranked Sites in Google. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. doi: 10.1111/jcc4.12043.

Sutton, R. I. & Staw, B. M. (1995). What Theory is Not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 371-384.

Theme 3: Research and theory

The research journal that I chose is Journal of Communication of the International Communication Association. It is published by Wiley-Blackwell and its impact factor was 2.011 for the year 2012. Its focus is on the field of communication studies. The journal publishes articles on communication research, practice, policy and theory as well as human and mediated communication.

The article that I chose to discuss is “The Benefits of Facebook “Friends:” Social Capital and College Students’ Use of Online Social Network Sites” (Ellison et al.: 2007). The article has been cited 3030 times (Google Scholar, 2013). It was published in the Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, which has an impact factor of 1.778.

This paper examined the relationship between Facebook usage and the formation and maintenance of social capital. Social capital is defined as “the resources accumulated through the relationships with people” and it is considered to be beneficial for members of societies (Ellison et al., 2007: 1145). This theory builds on theories about social capital in online and offline relationships and how it is affected by internet usage. The authors note that the social capital implications of Social Network Sites (SNS), such as Facebook, were unknown because there was little empirical research (Ibid: 1144).

286 undergraduate students of Michigan State University replied to the online survey system in April 2006. The researchers measured the intensity of Facebook usage, the student’s self-esteem and satisfaction about his/her college life. Plus, measures on the three types of social capital were used. Regression analysis was used to explore the hypotheses about Facebook usage and various forms of social capital.

The results of the research suggest a strong association between Facebook usage among college students and the three dimensions of social capital: bridging of social capital (refers to weak ties, loose connections between individuals), as well as bonding (individuals in close relationships) and maintained social capital (refers to the ability to maintain valuable connections in life when moving away from a community). Although no causal direction could be found, according to the results students use Facebook primarily to maintain existing offline relationships or to keep in touch with temporary acquaintances. Furthermore, it was suggested that those with low self-esteem and satisfaction from life can gain in social capital by using Facebook more intensively.

The empirical results of this research contrast with evidence of the time about potential for privacy abuses and with the concerns expressed in previous literature about the removal from offline world. The findings demonstrate strong connection between Facebook usage and indicators of social capital, which could be beneficial e.g. in getting information about jobs. 

One limitation of this research is related to the fact that only one community was examined, so the results cannot be generalized. Additionally, causality cannot be established since the researchers used one time survey (Ibid: 1164). Finally, it is noted that future research should use multiple methodologies (Ibid).

Briefly explain what theory is, and what theory is not.

Theory is a statement that answers to the question ‘why’ and ‘how’ something occurs. According to Sutton and North (1995) theory could be defined as a storytelling, as an explanation with clear and reasonable arguments, with an emphasis in the nature of causal relationships among phenomena. For Gregor (2006) the four central goals of theory are: analysis, explanation, prediction and prescription. 

 

References on previous works, data and empirical evidence, lists of variables or constructs, diagrams and figures and hypotheses are not constitute theory (Sutton and North, Ibid). Even though they support it, they do not constitute theory.

Describe the major theory or theories that are used in your selected paper.

The major theory used in my selected paper is analysis theory. Considering the time it was published, the theory was new and provided interesting insights on something that was poorly examined or imperfectly understood. It described the association between Facebook usage and indicators of social capital and it analyzed the relationship among them (Ibid: 619). The relationships specified were associative, not explicitly causal (Ibid: 623). The theory simply said “what is”; and since the authors underline that generalizations cannot be made and that causality cannot be established, the main type of theory used in this paper is the analysis (Ibid: 623).

Benefits and limitations of the analysis theory.

The benefits of using this theory type is that it provides an analysis of something that was poorly examined beforehand. As Ellison et al. (Ibid:1144) state, the social capital implications of SNSs, such as Facebook, were unknown.

On the other hand, this type of theory does not extend beyond analysis and description. It simply says what it is; it does not say how, why, when, where, what will be, how to do something (Gregor, Ibid). As I discussed above, in this theory generalizations cannot be made; causality cannot be established (Ibid). 

REFERENCE LIST:

Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C. and Lampe, C. (2007), The Benefits of Facebook “Friends:” Social Capital and College Students’ Use of Online Social Network Sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12: 1143–1168. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00367.x

Gregor, S. (2006). The Nature of Theory in Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 30(3), 611-642.

Google Scholar (2013). Google Scholar. [online] Available at: < http://scholar.google.se/scholar?hl=en&q=The+Benefits+of+Facebook+%E2%80%9CFriends%3A%E2%80%9D+Social+Capital+and+College+Students%E2%80%99+Use+of+Online+Social+Network+Sites&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_sdtp= > [Accessed 21 November 2013].

Sutton, R. I. & Staw, B. M. (1995). What Theory is Not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 371-384.

Reflections on Theme 2: Critical media studies

This week's theme involved reading Adorno and Horkheimer’s Dialectic of Enlightenment (1944), a book which I found to be really interesting because it is still contemporary. Despite the fact that it was written in the 1940’s, what is written in the book is true today.

Firstly, I would like to briefly mention the importance of the time and place that this book was written. The text is determined by the fact that two Germans, who were part of the cultural elite, lived in exile, in LA, during the Second World War. The authors’ critical discussion on how mass media were used by both the liberal democracies as well by the totalitarian regimes in order to manipulate people was shaped by this context (the time and place where they lived).

For me, the most interesting part was the fourth chapter “The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception” and the discussion on cultural industry, where emphasis is placed on mass production of culture. Culture is seen and treated as a product, not as art. This implies that culture is disposable. And these cultural products are characterized by sameness. This sameness is not restricted in cultural products; it is also seen in humans. As it was discussed during the lecture, according to Adorno and Horkheimer (Ibid), mass media are used instrumentally to produce uniformity in a society by isolating humans. At that time, radio, films and magazines were the modern communication media. Considering the examples presented in their book, radio is a medium designed in this way that does not allow active participation, interaction, critical thinking by the humans. The same thing applies to films, which could only be seen in movie theatres at that time. In both media, communication is characterized by isolation. So, for Adorno and Horkheimer, culture industry and mass media are used as instruments in order to indoctrinate humans and manipulate masses. 

In my point of view, contemporary communication is also characterized by isolation. Of course internet and social media nowadays allow for interaction and active participation, but I still find some kind of isolation in this type of communication. I feel that we are still alone, even though we might consider to be together since, for example, we are chatting online. In this sense I agree with Turkle (2011) and the notion that technology and social media bring us closer, but at the same time we go further apart.

The definition of art, and especially high art, was the starting point of an intriguing discussion during the seminar. We could not really agree upon what art is. I found that the authors, coming from the cultural elite, expressed a strong point of view on what could be considered as art. Someone distinguished between pop art and art. In the end, the teacher informed us that according to the most accepted definition “art is what you find in art galleries”. But this definition also troubles me since not all galleries define and present art in the same way. Art galleries might be run by people and institutions in such way so that they can promote their agendas. This, however does not mean that it is art. 

To conclude, what I got from this book and the discussions during the lectures and seminars is the importance of critical thinking. When discussing the use of media as a tool of mass deception, the authors noted the importance of critical thinking. By extending this, in our search of knowledge, science might not enough; we also need to critically think and discuss. 

REFERENCES:

Adorno, T. and Horkheimer, M. (2002): The Dialectic of Enlightenment, Philosophical Fragments. Standford: Standford University Press.

Turkle, S. (2011). Alone together: why we expect more from technology and less from each other. [e-book] New York Basic Books. Available through: Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan Library website: <http://proquest.safaribooksonline.com.focus.lib.kth.se/9780465022342?uicode=kungtek>  [Accessed 14 November 2011].

Theme 2: Critical media studies

Enlightenment

For Adorno and Horkheimer (The Dialectic of Enlightenment, 1944, p. 1) Enlightenment is the advance of thought- in the widest sense. The authors defined it as the radicalization of the mythical fear (Ibid, p. 11). Before Enlightenment humans were under the power of nature, because they were afraid of the unknown. Through scientific knowledge, humans are able to understand nature and thus manage to overcome this fear. It is stated that “Humans believe themselves as free of fear when there is no longer anything unknown” (Ibid, p. 11). Once humans are liberated from myths, the can dominate nature and other human beings. Enlightenment, as I understand it, is the passage from myths to knowledge.

According to the authors Enlightenments’ first traces can be seen in Homer’s Odyssey (Ibid, p.  xvii).

Myth

Adorno and Horkheimer define “myth” as a false clarity (Ibid, xvii). So, according to them, myth is the knowledge that existed before Enlightenment. This knowledge is not to be confused with scientific knowledge. “Myth sought to report, to name, to tell of origins-but therefore also to narrate, record, explain” (Ibid, p. 5). This involved rituals, which were trying to represent how things happened through mimesis (Ibid). In this type of knowledge, truth and reality were not distinguished (Ibid, p. 7).

As I mentioned above, before Enlightenment humans were dominated by the fear of the unknown. So, according to my understanding of myths and their function, myths involve the exercise of power over humans through the fear of the unknown.

Old and new media

Film, radio and magazines are the old media discussed in “The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception”. For the authors film, radio, magazines form a system (Ibid, p. 94) which provides the norms and makes sure that standardization and mass production is achieved in society (Ibid, p. 95).

If I interpret the authors right, television is the new medium. Adorno and Horkheimer (Ibid, p. 96) discuss that television aimed at a synthesis of radio and film, which was delayed since the interested parties could not reach an agreement (Ibid).

Culture industry and relationship between mass media and mass deception

Adorno and Horkheimer describe culture industry as the industry in which culture is treated as a commodity. Cultural products that are produced and diffused by different media, film, magazines, radio, are characterized by sameness (Ibid, p. 94). As I mentioned above, film, radio and magazines form a system, which produces cultural products. The system is characterized by mass production and standardization. Even though it is claimed that the standardized forms in the production processes come from the consumers’ needs, in the end they serve one goal: to manipulate humans in a more effective way. To be more specific, the cultural commodities are consumed by humans without critical evaluation. The cultural products are the same, so they provide a specific image on how the individual should behave, look, live etc. Since this image is consumed without critical evaluation, it becomes accepted by the individual and incorporated as a standard; and this standard is to be followed. Should the individual not conform in the circulated  image , it will be excluded from the society. And in the capitalistic society, exclusion is considered to be death. Thus, humans are turned into marionettes who can easily be controlled. 

So, the term cultural industry is used to describe the marketization of culture and how culture has become a business that conforms individuals and controls them in a deeper and more effective way.

Regarding the relationship of mass media and mass deception, it is clear that the mass media are used as an effective tool to deceive the individuals. What is important in this case is there is no use of force into making the individuals conform in one idea. The individuals are forcing themselves into conforming to this idea, while they under the impression that this is what they want.

Reflections

I find it really interesting that the individuals are under the impression that this is what they want, that it is their choice. According to the authors “the question “What do people want?” lies in the fact that it appeals to the very people as thinking subjects whose subjectivity seeks to annul”. The concept subjectivity intrigued me, so I started looking more deeply into this. My research led me to Foucault and his description of how discipline is articulated and how to regulation is reached into a society (Foucault, 1997), through self-regulating individuals (du Gay et al., 1986).

Lastly, taking into consideration the time and place when this book was written and published, it should be noted that the authors discuss how mass media like radio were used during the Second World War as a propaganda tool.  

REFERENCES

Adorno, T. and Horkheimer, M. (2002): The Dialectic of Enlightenment, Philosophical Fragments. Standford: Standford University Press.

du Gay, P., Salaman, G . and Rees B. (1986), The conduct of management and the management of conduct: contemporary managerial discourse and the constitution of the ‘competent’ manager, Journal of Management Studies, 33(3), pp. 263-282.

Foucault, M. (1997), Society Must Be Defended –Lectures at the Collège de France, 1975/76, Ewald, F. and Fontana, A. (Eds.), Chapter 11 (pp. 239-264).Penguin Books.

Reflections on Theme 1: Theory of Science

This week’s theme, The Theory of Science, involved reading and analyzing Bernand Russell’s “The Problems of Philosophy” (1912). Russell begins the discussion on knowledge by asking is there is any knowledge in the world so certain which no reasonable man can doubt.

In regards to my studying, I would like to mention that I found reading “The Problems of Philosophy” to be quite challenging, but nevertheless an interesting experience. Reading the literature enabled me to understand the main concepts and the reasoning behind them. But if I had to choose the most important part of my learning process, that would be reading on other students’ blog posts how they understood and interpreted the literature.

For me, the most interesting part was of this week’s theme was Russell’s approach on the difference between appearance and reality. Another important discussion in “The Problems of Philosophy” was the difference between knowledge- true beliefs- erroneous beliefs and probable opinions. I found it intriguing that for Russell, the biggest part of what we consider knowledge is actually probable opinions. Furthermore, I re-evaluted the importance of doubting and the necessity of critical thinking of things and theories. 

Concerning my peer’s blog posts, I found them helpful in the sense that they provided me with connections on subjects and notions presented in the literature. Plus, reading what other students wrote enabled me to focus on the important things. To be more specific, I understood that knowledge by definite description concerns things that we are not acquainted with, but we know that there is a thing answering to that definite description.  But it was my peer’s blog posts that enabled me to better understand the importance of this notion-it allows us to obtain knowledge about something that we are not immediately acquainted with. And as Russell (1912) discusses in the “Limits of Philosophical Knowledge”, there are no limits in our knowledge by descriptions- as there are limitations concerning our knowledge from experience on what exists. 

I had also understood that propositions and statements of facts differ from other kinds of verbal expressions in the sense that they are carriers of the truth-value through reading other students’ blog posts. Plus, through reading from my peers’ posts that a proposition thoroughly examined and tested is accepted as a statement of fact I understood that it is the consensus that makes a proposition a statement of fact.  A couple of my peers mentioned that sense data varies from individual to individual, so I realized that I might have missed the importance of that.

Coming back on the question of if there knowledge in the world so certain which no reasonable man can doubt, I should mention that as a reasonable woman, I doubt on my knowledge on The Theory of Science...

In the end, I would like to point out that I would feel more comfortable if I had the possibility to participate in discussions at lectures and seminars. 

Theme 1: Theory of science

What does Russell mean by "sense-data" and why does he introduce this notion?

According to Russell (The Problems of Philosophy, 1912) an object cannot be immediately known to us. We can only know an object through sings that we perceive about this object, signs that are associated to it. Russell defines “sense-data” as the things that we are immediately aware of, such as colours, smells, sounds, roughness etc of an object, while the experience of immediately being aware of those things is called sensation.

“Sense-data” depend on the way that we perceive them, on our senses. But, regardless of how much “sense-data” depend on us, their occurrence is a sign that exists independently of us. Our conception of sense-data depends on the relationships between us and the object. The important thing is that there is an object, regardless of its nature.

The reason why Russell introduced this notion is related to the fact that we cannot immediately know an object; if there is any. Our knowledge on the object comes from conclusions based on our immediate awareness- the “sense-data”. Russell introduced this notion to answer the question of whether this object really exists. And if there is such an object, what sort of object could it be?

What is the meaning of the terms "proposition" and "statement of fact"? How does propositions and statement of facts differ from other kinds of verbal expressions?

A proposition is a statement about a thing based on a judgement or a belief and it could be of the form “X is Ψ”. The same proposition could be said in different ways, e.g. we can use a name or words to describe a person in a proposition.

Russell underlines that the “proposition” should be composed of constituents with which we are acquainted. According to one example provided in the book, “two plus two equals four” is a “proposition”. Based on a priori knowledge, we know that two plus two will always give four. This is true. It is a fact. But whether it is a statement of fact or not depends on the situation.

So, “propositions” and “statements of facts” differ from other kinds of verbal expressions in the sense that they state something about the truth.

In chapter 5 ("Knowledge by Acquaintance and Knowledge by Description") Russell introduces the notion "definite description". What does this notion mean?

There are two types of knowledge: “knowledge of things” and “knowledge of truths”. This chapter is about the “knowledge of things” and this type of knowledge is further distinguished into “knowledge by acquaintance” and “knowledge by description”. The latter is about our knowledge concerning things that we are not acquainted with.

When talking about “knowledge by description”, Russell means any phrase of the form ‘a so-and-so’ or ‘the-so-and-so’. The author calls the phrase of the form ‘a so and so’, e.g. ‘a man’, as an “ambiguous description”, while the phrase of form ‘the-so-and-so’ (in the singular), e.g. ‘the man with the iron mask’ is defined as “definite description”. So, knowledge by definite description concerns things that we are not acquainted with, but we know that there is an object/thing answering to that definite description.

 

In chapter 13 ("Knowledge, Error and Probable Opinion") and in chapter 14 ("The Limits of Philosophical Knowledge") Russell attacks traditional problems in theory of knowledge (epistemology). What are the main points in Russell's presentation?

Russell discusses the difference between knowledge, error and probable opinion and he comments that the biggest part of what we consider as knowledge is probable opinion.

He argues that a true belief cannot be considered as knowledge. 

Part of his critique was about fragmentary and relational character of things. Russell criticizes the notion of the nature of the thing, which seems to mean all truths about a thing. This is not the case- the truth about a thing is not part of the thing itself. According to this reasoning we would never be able to know a thing’s true nature unless we know all the things’ relations to other things in the universe. We may have knowledge of a thing by acquaintance and acquaintance does not logically demand a knowledge of all its relations.

Building on Cantor and other mathematicians, Russell also attacks the philosophical arguments that tended to show the impossibility of infinite collections in the universe. According to him, the reasons for considering space and time as unreal are inoperable. Russell explained that there is a limit to our knowledge from experience on what exists; but no such limit exists in our knowledge by description (about things that we cannot have direct experience). He appears to be optimistic when saying that there are now new opportunities in knowledge. 

alfa

hej hej!