Cameron's reduction on alcoholic class in the UK.

So, earlier this year, our reptillian PM, Mr David Cameron increased the alcohol duty rates on all nice beers (of the higher percentage). This meant an increase of around 4p per pint, which seems negligable, but it all adds up especially when considering the reduction in tax on cheap, dirty and down right terrible lower percentage beers.

Now, any right minded person may at this point be questioning why it is worth getting irritated by such a difference and suggest just drinking a dirty lager? But the question is, as a student, would you prefer to go home at the end of the night with the customary haze of alcohol abuse, or pass out half way home whilst heaving your bloated water-filled body up the hill like some grotesque reincarnation of Jabba the Hut?

Well I'll tell you what I want, the government to stop meddling in our perfectly legal activities. With the risk of sounding like some ill-informed John Locke, leave us alone!

HCJ - philosophy summarised for your viewing pleasure...

1. The main argument in Hobbes' Leviathan is the need for a single, unquestioned ruler. This is due to Hobbes' pessimistic view of human nature, from which, Hobbes believes that humans will descend into anarchy. This same view is shared by Machiavelli who said 'men are wicked'.

They both also see perception as the reason for human natures inability to peacefully co-exist.

However they differ in their view of the ruler as Hobbes' Leviathan is elected and open to attack if he fails to provide defence for his people. Machaivelli believes that the ruler is monarchic and doesn't mention any limits to their power. This could be due to his contemporary monarchic audience though.

2. John Locke has an optimistic view of human nature, with a 'natural law' being agreeable by the majority.

He, like Hobbes, believes that property would cause dispute and thus an elected government would be needed to dissolve these disputes.

He also believes that this government should refrain from imposing themselves upon society in any way other than helping to dissolve disputes of property.

He was the 'father of Empiricism' and thus Empiricism is the underlying political theory.

3. Descartes view of the world is that it is entirely formed by our minds, this is a 'Solipsistic' view and is argued by the feeling we get from being in dreams that they are real, thus Descartes argues that we could equally be in a dream world or someone else's imagination in the 'real world we perceive or that our perception could be an incorrect view of the world around us.

Plato holds the belief that there is a problem in that the world around us is constantly changing e.g. sunrise, weather etc. Yet our perception in our mind is constant. To explain this Plato suggests there is a world of forms from which we get our constant perceptions from, this differs from the 'imperfect' material world in which we appear to live.

4. Deductive reasoning: assuming something will happen from knowledge: if i kick the football, it will move.

Inductive reasoning: post-event analysis: i kicked the football and it moved therefore my kick must've caused the football to move.

Hume doesn't believe in cause and says that the belief in causation has a negative effect of scientific progress and is created by the mind. Having said this he is sceptical of the deductive thought process and believes that these deductions are all of varying degrees of certainty, with none being absolutely certain.

Apriori - innate knowledge, an idea known to us before our physical existence without any evidence. (bulls**t basically)

Aposteriori - Knowledge gained through experience, testing and other such things. We learn Aposteriori ideas from doing things. (not bulls**t)

5. Rousseau: said to be the founder of the romantic movement, this was a call to prevent the progression of science and re-enter into a uncivilised lifestyle, staring at natural occurrences. Rousseau believed that society  and civilisation was making the world worse and decreasing the happiness of people, greatly contrasting the views of the 18th century. Romanticism was seen as a rebellion, and against the progress that had been fought for following the Medieval Age. His argument stemmed from the idea that war was only fought when two civilisations came against each other, which is obvious because if we all lived as singularities then you could only really have a two person fight, which if you were to call 'war' would occur far more frequently in an uncivilised society. On top of this, when a person wins in this scenario, there's always going to be another person to compete with, as opposed to a long period of relative peace that usually follows for the winning society. (I'm not pro-war, just anti-imbecile).

Law revision.

1. The supreme court is the highest court in the UK.

2. Directors of public prosecution hire the prosecutors in criminal cases.

3. The Crown Courts hear:
- indictable cases
- appeals
- tribunals

4. Magistrates Courts are responsible for:
- summary justice (non-indictable cases)
- either way cases
- committal hearings
- bail applications

5. Criminal offences: committed against the person or the state.

   - as opposed to -

Civil cases: a dispute between two parties.

6. Statute law: enacted by parliament (Common law is set by a judge).

7. Prejudice: judging someone before any evidence is heard. (not good).

Contempt: compromising the integrity of a case and/or denying someone a fair trial.

8. A case becomes legally active when 'it is likely there will be a trial' (This is a blurred definition, practically speaking it is active once someone is charged.)

9. After an arrest, only neutral facts can be reported about the case.

10. When a case is in Magistrates Court we can only report:
- Name age etc (Pos. I.D.)
- the Charge
- whether bail was requested and whether it was granted (but not why)
- Their plead.

The rest will be added later. Need to revise for Philosophy.

Sound Radio: in the news.

You will be able to hear some of these on 'sound radio', the uni's local radio station. If you're outside of the local area you can find it on the internet! Every hour, all day! They also play some pretty good tunes on occasion. Anyway, here it is.

Building collapse causes road closure in Southampton.

A building collapse in Cumberland Place, Southampton has meant that roads remained closed.

The partial breakdown of the building, that was in the process of being demolished, is likely to cause delays around Southampton city centre. The Council has said that, once opened, the Grosvenor Sq link road will remain closed until Monday 12^th December.

Below average school attendance in Southampton has meant that Southampton City council are calling for parents to help improve school attendance.

The statement has placed the blame on parents, suggesting that taking children on holiday during term time, and allowing absence due to minor illness is the major cause of the problem.

Hey man! look at me rocking out! i'm on the radioooooooh!

Today in newswriting I've gone right on ahead and written a radio script... Didn't have the 'cahones' to do anything more important just yet. But I imagine that might come with an increase in health. Enjoy!:

In Sport:

Winchester have come from behind to win 2–1 against Bashley to progress from the third round of the Hampshire Senior Cup.

Winchester can expect to face the likes of Gosport Borough, Romsey Town and AFC Totton in the next round.

And finally...:

Sutton Council have employed a crack squad of Sussex cattle to replace lawnmowers when cutting the rare chalk grasslands of Roundshaw Downs.

The change is expected to save Sutton Council £2000 per year according to Councillors.

I'm sure you'll agree, it's hard-hitting stuff.

David Hume, but it's not certain...

David Hume

David Hume (1711-1776)’s theories on certainty can be summarised by the phrase; ‘can’t derive an ought from an is’. This phrase outlines Hume’s belief that nothing is certain and that, although experience is usually our only source of information, due to our ‘synthetic’ way of thinking, humans often allow our past experience to lead us into error by assumption. In this way Hume is very sceptical and would even disagree that the Sun will definitely rise tomorrow and that every event has a differing degree of certainty based on human testimony and sensory experience.

The synthetic method is how Hume believes we, as humans, think most of the time: combining our past experiences and simpler ideas to form more complex ones. A good example of this would be the concept of angels, where we have taken our experience of human beings and combined them with that of birds, thus creating the idea of such a creature without any sensory experience of one. The fact that humans think like this fuels Hume’s argument for the ridiculousness of belief in miracles and religion. It is important to note however, that Hume is not suggesting that miracle a certain to not have occurred, instead that through a natural ability to assess the likelihood of an occurrence. From this Hume suggests that the likelihood that the person who would spread word of a miracle is far more likely to be a deceiver or be deceived than the extremely unlikely occurrence of a miracle or the physical apparition of a god etc. Hume suggests that the synthetic method of thought is far better for scientific progress due to the potential for creativity through it’s usage, he warns however that one must be wary as it can lead to error due to assumption, hence his emphasis on the uncertainty of anything. He also believes that this uncertainty means that with scientific thought, one cannot assume causation, with the best example being that of billiard balls. Hume would suggest that no matter how many time a person has experimented with billiard balls; seeing a white ball hit a red ball and seemingly forcing it to move, it is not so that the white ball has caused the red ball to move, merely that the balls have happened to move at those angles every time it is repeated, as one can’t be certain that will happen again in the same way. This is a habit of association, where a mind associates the two events the two events together regularly; to the point where one might believe that the movement of the white ball must cause the movement of the red ball, however, Hume argues against this.

He compares the synthetic process with the deductive process, which he claims can have no use in scientific thought, an example of this process is the conclusion that all bicycles must have two wheels, this is because anything with more or less wheels than this goes by another name e.g: tricycle, unicycle etc.

Hume, due to his comprehension of the synthetic thought process, did not place any faith in metaphysics, as he saw the theories to have no grounding in likelihood, but a fabricated theory built to fit what we don’t know, Hume argues that this is preventing scientific progress, with those who accept unfounded testimonies require no proof as to what actually occurs when an event happens, and thus no developments can be made regarding improvement or prevention of events. Hume validates this theory by assessing the false prophet Alexander and the Paphlagonians, a civilization that was ‘ignorant and stupid’ in comparison to the rest of the world, and the belief that they placed in the testimony of humans even though they were known to be untrue by the more informed world outside. He then berates religion by saying that belief in such a thing is belief in conformity, following the human testimony of the masses rather than evidence or sensory data and that those; who are weak enough to think that such testimonies are even worth a second thought, have no opportunity for receiving any ‘better information’. A point that is even raised by Western Christians in modern times (when discussing terrorist beliefs and motives): Even though they themselves place belief in equally unlikely and unfounded human testimonies