AccueilAccueil  CalendrierCalendrier  FAQFAQ  RechercherRechercher  MembresMembres  GroupesGroupes  S'enregistrerS'enregistrer  ConnexionConnexion  


 Exposés S1.

Aller en bas 


Messages : 790
Date d'inscription : 12/02/2015

Exposés S1. Empty
MessageSujet: Exposés S1.   Exposés S1. Icon_minitimeSam 6 Jan - 0:54

- Géographie (culture).
- Philosophie (Hume).
- Histoire environnementale des USA (nucléaire).

Dernière édition par thestral. le Sam 6 Jan - 2:11, édité 1 fois
Revenir en haut Aller en bas
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur


Messages : 790
Date d'inscription : 12/02/2015

Exposés S1. Empty
MessageSujet: Re: Exposés S1.   Exposés S1. Icon_minitimeSam 6 Jan - 0:56



"We could think of culture as aprocess we are all involved in rather than a thing we all possess." - Philip CRANG.

Intro ; Culture is a complicated word. Did you know that by the 1950's, there was like 150 definitions of culture ? Mike Crang said that culture "can only be approached as embedded in real-life situations, in temporally and speaking ways" which means that culture is kind of material, and not only spiritual. (milla)

So, culture is a part of our everyday's life - indeed, it takes its basis on language, religion and ethnicity since that's where our way of living is also from. Two persons who speak swahili but are from different religions, and different origins, won't have the same culture, although they will share the same language. Two christian peoples from two different countries will not have the same way of living. (elise)

When you think about culture, you always think of your culture. The one you've grown in, been raised by. The one that influed over your way of thinking, eating, dressing, speaking, even the way you interract with others. But you never think of the fact that YOU are the one who makes your culture. (emma)

Enjoying a croissant for breakfast is cool : but do you think that 3 centuries ago, french people were doing so ? Someone brought croissants here and made them famous - and culture evolved. What did make culture evolve ? People ! Just like us ! (elise)

Now, think about this croissant you love so much. Visualize it. Feel it. Smell it. You can find them all around the globe, and not only in our dear old France. Eating a croissant in a cold morning in Iceland, a warm summer in Istanbul, a rainy day in London is possible !  (milla)

Is culture forced to stay in a specific territory ? This, guys, fall right into the problematic we are going to study : to what extent does culture have a global impact ? With the example of the croissant, we've seen that indeed, culture seems to spread itself all over the world. (emma)

milla dit la pb

We will begin by studying cultural globalization, since globalization is a recurrant subject in the question of culture. We will then talk about multiculturalism and hybrid cultures. Then, we will finish by talking about geographers and culture. (elise)

I ) Cultural globalization.
- Impact of globalization on local culture.

II ) Multiculturalism and hybrid culture.

III ) Geographers and culture.

A ) Cultural geography

I'd first like to introduce you to the concept of Cultural geography.

After noticing that the world changed a lot on the past two decades, geographers started to pay some attention towards a cultural explanation for these changes - that's how Cultural Geography was born. It is a branch of Human Geography which permits to study the link between the interactions of culture, and how it affects the world, the material world. It gives the possibility to focus on the impact of human culture on the natural environment, and the organization of space.

It was led by Carl Sauer, an american geographer of the 19th century, also called "the father of cultural geography", who said that landscapes make culture develop, but that culture also helps to develop the landscape.

This phenomenon can be observed in the way Native Americans live and have lived in Alaska : the way their houses are built depends on their landscape, and the landscape also influed over their way of living (ex : they mostly eat mooses beacause it's a widespread specie in this state).

B) Cultural and spatial turns in social sciences.

Indeed, the changes in the world were both cultural and spacials. That's why cultural geography finds favor to the eyes of geographers : it is not only a look over the people, but also the world.  And that's why I would like to talk about cultural and spatial turns in social sciences.

For example, the feminization of the workforce or the decline of manufacturing were cultural changes which resulted in an affect over the economy.

Also, culture is becoming so easy to access that it becomes into a source of money, it is turned into material goods that can be sold. Example : St. Patrick's Day in Ireland. It is known as a religious celebration, has spread a lot and now many material goods linked with this day are sold. You can now buy "Saint Patrick's set fancy dress costume", hats, and many things which are related to this celebration.

As we said, spatial turns also happened in the world. The expansion of the Internet means that the world is becoming more and more interconnected, wich makes communication easier. It has been said that culture can operate at three scales : national, global, and local, which shows its power. These include the movements of people for different reasons (tourism, religion, music, cinema, etc). For example, the amount of people who travel to Mecca every year : it is a spacial influence of culture since religion is deeply cultural. Or the Comic Cons which attract a lot of people.

CC HP : Emma


CC générale : So we saw that culture had indeed a global impact over the world. We studied this problematic first through globalisation, which can be seen as a positive effect because the world we live in today is the result of several cultures. But it also can be seen as a drawnbacks because globalisation often leds to the uniformisation of forms of living, and the vanishing of particularities. (moi)

We then talked about the mixture of culture, which resulted in hybrid culture and multicultural spaces. We focused on what was the impact of these two "cultures", whether it was good or not. Finally, we studied and gave the definition of cultural geography and its origins, before focusing on the social and spatial changes engendered by culture. (milla)

docutment : ici (primark oxford spécial hp)

I ) Pourquoi ce doc + lien avec la problématique : Milla

II ) Description et échelle (expansion dans le monde) : Emma

III ) Critique du document et impact économique : Elise

We're not coming to our third and last part which consists of giving a critical view of this document, and then seing the economical impacts of culture over the world throught the example of this document.

So, first of all, we need to talk about this document. As we have all seen it, it is mostly an aesthetic video which has the purpose to attract possibles customers. It is marketting. It doesn't give any numbers, we don't see anyone talking, they basically just show us their products with a harry potter-related music in the background. The only information is the adress of the shop : we know it is the Primark of London, in Oxford Street, which is a street mostly known for being a commercial avenue.
from a cnbc article, writtent by Nick Wells and Mark Fahey, 13 Oct 2016, total value of hp's franchise since the beginning.

This graphic show us that by-products should not be neglected. They represent by themselves 7.3 billions of the 25 billions' euros franchise. That's even more than the movies, which are the second main carriers of the "Harry Potter universe" after the books, and represent "only" 7.2 billions euros of this franchise (which is less than the by-products).

By-products are a way to expend culture throught the globe - many of us already have some. I have by-products from many different's sources, such as Emma, Milla, and y'all, I'm sure about it. These by-products, or places, can also have a spacial impact such as over tourism : many Harry Potter's fans go to London to visit the Warner bros studios, and it goes the same way for the Harry Potter attraction park which opened in Hollywood.

pdf, def of culture:

III) cultural ans spacial turns:

III) geographers and culture:
Revenir en haut Aller en bas
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur


Messages : 790
Date d'inscription : 12/02/2015

Exposés S1. Empty
MessageSujet: Re: Exposés S1.   Exposés S1. Icon_minitimeSam 6 Jan - 0:56

12 mn
6 et 6 chacune
2 et 2 pour présenter
4 et 4 pour développer chacune un point

diapo 1.
Hume interrogates the principle of identity here, since he's searching to define it. His scepticism pushes him to question even more harder his thoughts, since he doubts of everything.
1st - seing an object isn't enough to give the idea of identity. hume says that the fact that there's in the sentence "an object is the same with itself" a word to say "object" and to say "itself" shows that the identity doesn't exist since there need to be a word to show the existence of the object. the word "itself" shouldn't exist since the identity of somebody shouldn't be reducted to just the word "itself". (l. 15 to 21) he then ads that several objects will never be able to give the idea of "identity", since the identity is individual and not plural. (l. 22 to 26) he comes to the statement that identity is neither related to the number ou the unity, so nothing because it doesn't exist something that isn't singular or plural. he even says that "there can be no no medium, no more than betwixt existence and non-existence". it exist, or it doesn't exist - there's nothing in between. (l. 27 to 33) he uses the image of time to illustrates his idea and simplifies it :
time = implies sucession > when we implie the idea of time to an object that cannot be changed, it's only thanks to imagination (because the object can't change so we rely on our capacity to imagine the future) to which the "cannot be changed object" is participating thanks to existence of others objects. so we rely on our experience and what we know to guess the future of an object that cannot be changed by the time.
he compares this example to the idea of identity, and says that maybe we define identity the same way we imagine the future of the object that can't be changed : we use our mind to imagine identity, so the idea of identity is purely hypothetical.
2nd part : distinction btw object and perceptions. sensations = the true objects, and not the object itself. ex : if i see a girl, the object is her scent, her texture, the noises she makes, not the girl herself. senses permits to distinct the object.
diapo 2.
some philosophers say that we are fully aware of our SELF and that we are certain of its identity/simplicity. passion/sensation > doesn't distract us from this view but fix our view more intensely > we consider passion (sensation)'ss= influence on the SELF either as PLEASURE or PAIN. passion's influence on the SELF can be a proof of the existence of the SELF, but is it enough ? we can't be sure of anything (>scepticism).
since self is supposed to exist through pain and plesure, it means we should always feel them - but it's not the case. passions and sensations don't always exist all at the same time - so the self can't exist through them, since it means that we should always feel them all the time.
> so how does our sensations belong/are connected to the self ?
h. : can"t find his SELF without a perception, and can't watch something else that this perception. if it's light = he sees the light, cold = he feels the cold, one at a time. when there is no sensation (=ex sleep) he doesn't feel himself, feels like his self doesn't exist. he also says that this is his perception of his SELF and that someone else might feel it in another way. but for h., the self =/= continued.
we can't trust our senses to feel our SELF (= ex can be alterate, our thought is variable). our mind is always changing, so can we really think that there is a SELF which never changes, and is constant ?
what makes us wanna give an identity to all these changes/successions and supposes that we exist uninterrupedly for all our life ? we need to separate :
- personal identity as it regards our thought/imagination.
ex : idea of an object, invariable and uninterrupted throught time (= identity, or sameness, doesn't change).
idea of some other different objects existing in succession, connected together by a relation : diversity. object 1 > object 2 > object 3 > etc. (succession, the object change, maybe that's how the self work ?). these objects = the same, yet interrupted in time.
- personal identity as it regards our passion/concern in oursleves.
diapo 3.
hard to give an answer. when we use "self" or "substance" we need an idea for those terms, otherwise we won't be able to get somewhere bc those words are very unclear. (= define your terms when you use them, so you know where you're going).
all perceptions are distinct from each others. they exist separately.
when i see a table and a chimney, nothing's present but perceptions. but table and chimney are two different objects > they exist separately. so i feel diffrent perceptions from each one.
when i try to perceive my SELF, i can never rely on perceptions.
what is the difference btw self and substance ?
all our distinct perceptions are distinct existences.
the mind never perceives any real connexion among distinct existences.
le point que je voudrai éclaircir moi :
ex : idea of an object, invariable and uninterrupted throught time (= identity, or sameness, doesn't change).
idea of some other different objects existing in succession, connected together by a relation : diversity. object 1 > object 2 > object 3 > etc. (succession, the object change, maybe that's how the self work ?). these objects = the same, yet interrupted in time.

+ traduction ici pcq je craque

mon développement :
In the second excerpt that we had to read, there's a point that i'd like to talk about. As I said earlier, Hume separated personnal identity in 2 : as it regards our thoughts or imagination, and as it regards our passion or concern in ourselves.
I'd like to improve what he said about the first (thoughts / imagination).
He gave the following example :
Take an object. It's invariable, and uninterrupted throught time (it's identity doesn't change, for example a chair will always be a chair). That is one way of seing identity.
Take another objet. Then, he exists in another succession of objects - and they are all connected together by a relation of diversity.
Take a tree which then will become a chair, which will be broke and recycled in another object, which will itself be recycled in another object again. That's the other way of seing personal identity - like somethings who's constantly changing, but keeps the same nature.
So the proper of the identity is to be constantly evolving ? Like you can't say "ok this is me, and that's it, forever". People change, so does their identity. If you are shy today, that doesn't mean that you'll be so in 40 years.
I think that, to me, this is the better description of identity that Hume gave in what we've read - and the more accurate. Since identity exists through human beings, and that human beings are constantly evolving, it seems that their identity, their SELF, should also do so.
Revenir en haut Aller en bas
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur


Messages : 790
Date d'inscription : 12/02/2015

Exposés S1. Empty
MessageSujet: Re: Exposés S1.   Exposés S1. Icon_minitimeSam 6 Jan - 0:57

Plan exposé histoire environnementale

INTRO 30 sec

Problématique: How did the history of the USA gave birth to a controversial view
of the nuclear energy ?

We will study this problematic by focusing on the history of domestic use, military
use and then the vision americans have of nuclear nowadays.

I. Domestic use
6mn (1mn30 par point)
A) History MILLA
B) Effects of fukushima MILLA
C) Energy reorganisation act ELISE

1974 : Nucl. Regulatory Comission (nrc) = new fed. law : "energy reorganization act" (era).

since the atomic energy act of 1954 : us atomic energy comission was only agency supervizing way nuclear was used

en. reorg. act. = rights of supervization split in two btw us atomic energy comission and energy research and dvlpment administration (erda) (currently : united states department of energy).

erda was given the responsibility for :

- the development and production of nuclear weapons
- the promotion of nuclear power (+other energy-related work)

+ the E.R.A assigned to the NRC the regulatory work (doesn't include regulation of defense nuclear facilities).

this federal law even gave (after a later amendment) a protect° to the whistleblowers (might suffer reprisals for raising nuclear safety concerns).

D) Incidents safety EMMA

II. Military use 6mn (1m30 par point)

A) History ELISE

US = heavy history w/ nuclear us in war.
1st country to get nuclear weapon (w/ help of uk, canada, australia).
only country to use it against ennemy (h&n, we'll see with emma later).
us carried out more than a thousand nuc. tests (large number, compared to France "only" 210, and the uk 45).

US held very 1st nuclear test : trinity test (july 1945, desert of jornarda del muert, new mexicio).
trinity test = part of manhattan projet (research during wwII, headed by the us). manhattan project = approved by canada and the uk.
manhattan project = origins of nuclear use in us, bc gave birth to desire to surpass other countries (especially whil the us were in a hurry against the nazi germ.) origins of military use of nuclear.

B) Nuclear war plans ELISE

SIOP created in 1961 (Dwight Eisenhower directed it).
Succedeed to H. Truman.
Truman was pessimistic & wanted to empower US" Nuc. Strenght.
Eisen. = inherited large budget for Nuclear. Cut it off from 5 billions dollar (too much + threatened US economy).

SIOP reunites Nuc.Weapons of : U.S Navy and U.S Air Force (increases its strategies of attack & defense bc both armies in it).
Purpose : set up a list of condit° in whicb Nuc. Weap. would be used in Nuc. War.

Eisenhower :
"on strictly military targets and for strictly military purposes, I see no reason why they shouldn't be used just exactly as you would use a bullet or anything else" (about tactical nuclear weapons)
> shows that the us govt. saw nuc. as smthing common

SIOP's creati° > shows that the us saw nuc. as a basis of their strategy, rather than a last resort opt°.

C) Hiroshima - Nagasaki ? EMMA
D) Current status EMMA

III. Nowadays 6mn (1mn30 par point)
a) Pollution MILLA
b) Alternative energies ELISE

- renewable energies = use sunlight, wind , tides, geothermal heat, biofuel, biomass to produce energy such as electricity (ex. wind with the wind turbines)

renew. energies = 14.94 % of the domestically produced electricity in the United States while nuclear = 19.7% of the nation's total electric energy generation.  (both 2016 numbers)
> shows that renewable energies slowly catch up with nuclear (will  surpass it maybe ?)

- "a new era of energy exploration" (< obama)
obama asked that the us doubled its use of the renewable energy in 2009 : it worked.
(renewable energies = 3.6% of electricity generation in 2009, 14.94% today).

c) Economy MILLA
d) Views, now & debates EMMA

CCL 30 sec


Revenir en haut Aller en bas
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur
Contenu sponsorisé

Exposés S1. Empty
MessageSujet: Re: Exposés S1.   Exposés S1. Icon_minitime

Revenir en haut Aller en bas
Exposés S1.
Revenir en haut 
Page 1 sur 1

Permission de ce forum:Vous ne pouvez pas répondre aux sujets dans ce forum
le bordel. :: le bordel. :: ppb-
Sauter vers: