The first lecture I have attended this year was focused around the 14th to 18th century. This period of time could well be the most important time for the progression of human intelligence and what we believe to be true. During this period of time two era's are set in action; The Renaissance and The Age of Enlightenment. These brought a revolutionary way of thought in defining what is fact and what is belief and where we can draw a line in between.
The french philosopher Rene Descartes opened this debate with his saying; 'Cogito ergo sum'. For those who are less classical minded than myself you may also know this as 'I think , therefore I am'. This was his way of proving the existence of God. This may have been a very early idea but it would lay the foundations for many future philosophers. The idea raised here gave freedom to every man, woman and child.
The reason this new age of thought had been set in motion was because of The Renaissance period. As Chris Horrie put it; 'Imagine someone one day out and found a lot of papers in a case that had been forgotten'. This summarises The Renaissance. The Middle Ages had left many classical ideas behind and slowly they were forgotten. This left a large gap in our knowledge of Greek Civilisation. However, when this 'case' was found again, we learnt many things we had not known before. We learnt about Architecture, Life but arguably the most important discovery was the ravings of ancient philosophers. Aristotle was, arguably , the most important of these. He was held in such great esteem that Cicero called his works ' A river of Gold'. He mainly focused on what he called science but even this raised doubt over fact. For instance, Aristotle was the first man to include a fifth element in his list of matter. This was known as Aether which he claimed was the creator of heavenly bodies. Other Classical writers had not included this in their analysis of the world we live in so this prompted a question. What is fact and what makes it so?
Sir Issac Newton was revolutionary in the attempt to answer this question. His science was something had not been seen before . He refers to an invisible substance known as gravity. This is the force that causes things to fall form trees such as apples. However, how can we decide whether this is the true reason for the apple falling. Many originally considered Newton's theories to be ridiculous and yet it has developed into what we would today classify as Science, in particular physics. This could easily be a belief. Science claims to have proved the Big Bang to have caused the creation of the universe. Other's believe God sprung the world into existence over 7 days. There is no way of determining which one is fact. Descartes' theory would mean to each separate group of believer that their beliefs were true. Each has, which in literary terms would be called, a framing device. One a set of numbers claiming we can see radiation and the Bible claiming reports of God's actions and how he orchestrated them.
I could go on for hours, and to be honest, I quite want to. However, I'm off to read McNae's Essential Law for Journalists. To draw this to a close, the lecture taught us about a new way of thinking. More importantly it taught us about the nature of fact. Micheal Parkinson recently won a year long legal battle against the Daily Mail for their claims about his Uncle. Fact is essential to a journalist and what was believed to be Fact by the Daily Mail was in fact not. A journalist (like myself) must be sure that what he writes is the truth. If we were not abide by this fundamental principle then the news would simply be rumour. I hope I can learn from these Scholars and events such as the one I have just referenced to improve my chances to become a great journalist!
