#functionalism

[matthiasheiderich]

Kunsthochschule Kassel. Architect: Paul Friedrich Posenenske. Photo: Matthias Heiderich

[scavengedluxury]

Machnác spa, Trenčianske Teplice, 1935. From the Budapest Municipal Photography Company archive.

[purasvagancias]

Sander Petelski

[morisonus]

This is probably a cold take, but when it comes to Transformers I tend to prefer fanon over canon, mainly with how they deal with societal issues. Including the war.

I understand the franchise is innately made for children, or at most teenagers, so many topics need to be watered down for the sake of clarity and understanding. (I know IDW and other continuity’s are an exception to this, but I’m mainly talking about cartoons and the more widely known about media) War isn’t black and white, that’s a given and something everyone should know and consider. This is a very simplified generalization of my opinions, and it very much varies depending on the context, but when a conflict escalates to a war, more often than not, both sides have their reasoning, and both sides commit immoral acts for the sake of their cause. Transformers is no exception. My favorite backstory’s of the war is Megatron, a bottom class worker turned revolutionary fighting for equality in an unfair system, and Optimus, a middle class worker slowly becoming aware of the injustices in his society, wishing to do something and make a difference. When you start the characters as that, it’s obvious that they are both fighting for a common and righteous cause. Their paths are often split when it comes to methods, and what their end goal is. While they both fight for a similar purpose, their experiences greatly affect how they see their would and laws, and how they need to be changed. Megatron is from the lowest of the low, where violence and abuse is commonplace towards those deemed lower than others. Optimus comes from a world of comparative privilege, able to choose wha the does in his free time, how he associates with, and has power over his own life. Of course Megatron feels that a more radical and total change is necessary when the system in place has killed and mistreated him and countless of his peers. Yes, Optimus can see why the system is wrong and a general idea of what needs to be changed, but seeing it is different from living it. Whether that is a detriment or positive depends on how your mindset is molded by it.

This post has just devolved into a brain dump of all the thoughts in my brain. I don’t even know what the original purpose pf writing this was. If I got something wrong, or you have differing opinions, please share and or correct me because I am more than willing to listen and learn. This is simply my two cents on what I know and how I see it.

[swallowingscrapmetal]

[nadziejacher]

Alvar Aalto library in Vyborg

@nadziejaestel

[spacespacespace]

Listening to Penelope Scott while making sociology notes is so fucking vibes

[metropolitanmodernist]

Night view of the 1930 Stockholm Exhibition site, illuminated by electric lighting and neon signs. Photographer: Gustav W:son Cronquist.

In view: Sigurd Lewerentz's advertising mast / reklammasten, and Gunnar Asplund's Paradiset, the main restaurant / huvudrestaurangen.

Image: ArkDes Collections // SU30: in colour

[arogantskai]

ragaz tranzitoriu

[oonajuliana]

[scavengedluxury]

Palace Hotel, Košice, 1939. From the Budapest Municipal Photography Company archive.

[conformi]

Karl Friedrich Schinkel, Tent Room | Schloss Charlottenhof, Potsdam, Germany, 1882-1890 VS Arne Jacobsen, Bellevue Teatret, Copenhagen, Denmark, 1936

[omegaphilosophia]

The Philosophy of the Problem of Other Minds

The "Problem of Other Minds" is a classic issue in philosophy, particularly in epistemology and the philosophy of mind. It addresses the question of how we can know that other people have minds and mental states similar to our own. This problem challenges our understanding of consciousness, perception, and intersubjectivity, raising profound questions about empathy, communication, and the nature of human relationships.

Understanding the Problem of Other Minds

At its core, the problem is about the epistemic gap between one's own direct experience of their mind and the inference that others have similar mental experiences. While we have direct access to our thoughts, feelings, and sensations, we do not have the same access to the minds of others. We can only observe their behavior and make inferences about their mental states.

Key Questions and Issues

Epistemological Challenge: How can we justify the belief that others have minds? Our knowledge of other minds is indirect, based on the observation of behavior and the assumption that similar behavior implies similar mental states.

Analogical Argument: One common response is the analogical argument, which posits that since other people exhibit behavior similar to ours and we know that our behavior is caused by our mental states, it is reasonable to infer that their behavior is caused by similar mental states. However, this argument is often criticized for its reliance on analogy, which may not provide a solid epistemological foundation.

Behaviorism: Some philosophers, particularly behaviorists, argue that mental states are nothing more than behavioral dispositions. According to this view, to ascribe a mental state to someone is simply to describe a set of behaviors and tendencies. This approach attempts to sidestep the problem by redefining mental states in terms of observable behavior.

Phenomenological Approach: Phenomenologists focus on the direct experience of intersubjectivity, emphasizing empathy and the shared human condition. This approach suggests that we can understand other minds through a direct, empathetic engagement with others, rather than purely inferential reasoning.

Philosophical Skepticism: Some argue that the problem of other minds leads to a form of skepticism. If we cannot have direct access to other minds, how can we be certain they exist? This skeptical view challenges the certainty of our knowledge about other people's mental lives.

Theory of Mind: Developmental psychology and cognitive science explore how humans develop the ability to attribute mental states to others. The "theory of mind" posits that humans naturally develop an understanding that others have beliefs, desires, and intentions that may differ from their own. This cognitive ability is crucial for social interaction and communication.

Functionalism: Functionalist theories in philosophy of mind suggest that mental states are defined by their functional roles rather than by their intrinsic properties. According to functionalism, if an entity (human or artificial) behaves in a way that fulfills the functional role of a mind, it can be said to have a mind.

Philosophical Implications

Ethics and Morality: The problem of other minds has significant ethical implications. Recognizing that others have minds is foundational for empathy, compassion, and moral consideration. If we doubt the existence of other minds, it undermines the basis for ethical behavior and interpersonal relationships.

Artificial Intelligence: The problem of other minds extends to the realm of artificial intelligence. As we develop more advanced AI, questions arise about whether these entities have minds and how we should treat them.

Intersubjectivity: Understanding other minds is crucial for communication and social interaction. The problem highlights the importance of shared experiences and common understanding in building social bonds and communities.

The Problem of Other Minds remains a central issue in philosophy, challenging our understanding of consciousness, perception, and intersubjectivity. While various approaches attempt to address this problem, it continues to provoke deep philosophical inquiry into the nature of mind and our knowledge of others.

[transingthoseformers]

The more I think about canon tfp Megatron, which I believe this fic's version of tfp and its inhabitants are pretty fucking close to canon and tfp Soundwave is going to remain as such for a while, the more I see he has a very strict system that's exactly influenced by pre-war Cybertron, his time in the pits, and his own idiosyncrasies. Yes I find his design fairly attractive, and highly enjoy specific fanon depictions, but I agree that in canon the way he set up the Decepticon hierarchy is maladaptive and dysfunctional. In canon he certainly has a "Life is a performance, I am the main character, and things will go my way regardless of everything" attitude, if that's the right way to explain it? It's a manipulative rhythm.

It reminds me a lot of Functionalism. Not as in the in universe terms of functionist where in there's a taxonomical ranking with some being elevated over others, such as in idwg1, but the sociology term. He's boiled everyone on his ship down to a role based on usefulness for his goals. Yes, Starscream is clearly a bit of a wildcard in his rhythm, but from what I can see in canon he's 100% the scapegoat in most continuities (even to some of the show writers, i theorize?) He's the guy who's the example to the rest of what happens to the disobedient.

This is purely based on my observations of canon tfp and canon tfp alone, temporarily ignoring the rest of aligned.

Tl;dr, canon tfp Megatron is easily one of the more obsessive versions, but he's also surprisingly deliberate in everything he says and does. Comparing it to roles/parts in a play is actually a fairly apt analogy. And in this fic we see its effects heavily on tfp Soundwave.

[cyhsal]

Acceptera! ✌️

Instagram // Twitter // Cara // 🔗