Theme 1
Charlotte Åbyhammar
My Comment:
I also tried to translate every single word in Kant's text to try to understand what they meant but didn't succeed.
Regarding the lecture, I found it hard as well but I don't think it would be much easier if it were in Swedish. This is a difficult way of thinking.
When you are saying "knowledge requires knowledge", do you think that experience is the same as knowledge? because i think knowledge requires experience.
My Comment:
Interesting to hear about the newborn child (he didn't mention it in my seminar group). I remember that he said that one time he woke up, because the phone rang, and he didn't know where he was, who he was and what the sound came from and meant. He had, in a way, lost all his experience of life for a second and I think that all of us have sometimes felt the same. I think that's how it feels like if you are seeing WITH your eyes and not through them.
Also glad to hear that it wasn't just me that interpreted kant's text "wrong". :P
Theme 2
Sofie Nilsson
My Comment:
I also finds the expression "You can't see the forest for the trees" as a good expression for nominalism. We discussed in our seminar group about the difference in how Nazi sees people, and how communists sees people. Nazis compare people as strong, long, fast, white etc which enables them to compare and prefer some sort of people which is a nominalistic way of seeing people. on the other hand communists see mankind as a group of people which they can set a "human"-label on. Nazis are seeing the trees and communists are seeing the forest.
Hannah Bylund
My Comment:
I think that you are explaining the key points very well and you summed it up in an understandable way! I also found Plato's cave to be a very good example and a illustrative example. It gave me a better understand of the concept, which I didn't understand when I read the texts. It was interesting to hear how to applicate this to the was Nazi-germany used their propaganda films.
Good Job!
Theme 3
Johan Huusmann
My Comment:
Hi Johan
I also found this week much more concrete in a way, but still abstract in a weird way.
Indeed its very hard to define the word theory and as you say the word can have different meaning for everyone. I like the definition that you are satisfied with, the bridge between raw data and hypothesis. But still, even if you have a definition its still hard to know what is a theory and what is it not, don't you agree?
I found it interesting when you said that the reason that the word theory might be hard to fully understand is due to the use of the common man.
Good reflection!
Cecilia Friström
My Comment:
Hi Cecilia
It sounds like you have really tried to understand the word theory, which is good. For me its still a bit abstract and I guess it will be, but when reading your text it somewhat clarify a bit for me.
I found it interesting when you wrote that when you are using the word theory in a non-science context, like a substitution for the word idea, it is not a valid or tested theory. But for me it sounds like thats not a theory, more like a hypothesis, since its not tested and confirmed, don't you agree? And when "non-science-people" use the word theory in everyday language its more like they use the word hypothesis.
Good job with the reflection!
Theme 4
Oscar Aldrin
My Comment:
Hi Oscar,
You said that you learned that you should test a questionnaire and survey before using it, I would like to hear how you are suppose to do that and if you learned any good method of doing it?
I also found the lecture structure good and it was nice with another setup, and not the usual lecture on monday and seminar on wednesday. Olle managed to keep up a discussion and still delivers tips and thoughts.
Keep up the good job!
Andreas Almqvist Gref
My Comment:
Hi Andreas!
I think that you manage to reflect upon the key points from this theme. To try you questionnaire before sending it to the responders are indeed crucial since you might be blind to your own mistakes.
I was thinking of the benefits, disadvantageous, possibilities and limitations that you mentioned, i would like to hear an example of a thing that you didn't know and learned on the seminar. According to me, most of the was kind of obvious, but still they are aspects that you normally don't think about, and then they was more highlighted than new knowledge.
Combining quantitative and qualitative methods are indeed useful!
There are indeed many psychological factors that you should consider when desiging a questionnaire. I thought it was interesting that Olle said that When you are designing a questionnaire, you should, or must, have an alternativ that are "in the middle" otherwise the responders get angry. I thought before that it was good not to have that alternative because people then had to reflect more and not just give the easiest answer, but i was wrong.
Good job!
Theme 5
Zulfiia Tarazova
My Comment:
Hi Zulfiia
This was a good recap from the lecture but I have a question:What did you know before you went to the lecture and what did you learn during the lecture? It would be fun to hear that.
I found it a bit confusing when Haibo said that big ideas and great ideas are ideas that generate money, like you wrote. But surely there are ideas that doesnt generate money and still are good ideas. Do you agree?
Noa Julin
My Comment:
Hi Noa
I couldn’t attend to Eva-Lottas lecture and therefore it was fun to read your reflection of that lecture. I first thought that when a research is made in an area where there are no previous knowledge you should use quantitative methods in order to get a glance over the “area” or subject. But, as you wrote, Eva-Lotta thought you should use qualitative methods. Which one do you think is best for the purpose? (I guess the combination would be best).
I found that the volume example that Haibo gave in order to highlight the importance of math is a good example too. It’s easy to misinterpret a situation if you only believe your senses, and therefore math is important in order to understand the results. Good that you highlighted that part if the lecture.
Theme 6
Johanna Sjöberg
My Comment:
Hi Johanna
I think its interesting that you are saying that you don't need to know what you are looking for in the beginning of a case study. But you also says that one usually has an idea about what you are searching for. I think that mobility is very interesting and a huge benefit of a case studies.
Its good that you can see both positive aspects and negative aspects of having this course after the bachelor thesis. I think its good to have it between the bachelor and the master thesis since, as you said, the things that we are reading about in this course makes more sense after the bachelor thesis and you will detect your mistakes that you have made and adjust them before the master thesis
By the way, good reflection!
Sofia Sjöberg
My Comment:
Hi Sofia
You said that we already know much about qualitative study and therefore it was good that we mostly focus on case studies, but did you think the same way about quantitative methods (?), that we already knew things about it. I did at least, and still I learned much about quantitative methods from the seminar with Olle. Don’t you think it would be the same with qualitative methods as well if we would have payed a lot more attention to it?
Its interesting when you are saying that a case is not created, it’s already there. The difficulty with it, is to understand what’s a case and not. What made-up case are and what existing cases are is in a way an interpretation of a phenomena made by man. I mean most of the cases that exist is once made up and defined as a case. One question that occurs is what is it that creates a case?
I agree that it is hard to determine whether or not a research article has used case study as a method since its a notion of nuance.
Great reflection BTW!
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar