The follow
ing post has two ass
ingments namely;
1.Bolter and Gromala arguement about “digital art"
Bolter and Gromala (2005, p.7) argue “digital art can be the purest form of experimental design”
Critically discuss this statement us
ing one of the three examples of digital artists or digital art projects
2.Hobbes state of nature
[2] what is Rousseau's argument (
in so many words) aga
ins
or Locke's State of Nature?
OR
131 There's a tension
in Hobbes between "15“ and."°“92Ee} 23236“
orients his political th
ink
ing toward man-as-he-IS hat "the ycgu
man-as-he-ought-to-be. Plato and Aristotle taught t at “the ifwf.
are ruled by their passions, but did not rule out tha t5 tgifu
Still Ought to try to be ruled by reason. Hobbes rejec ,L J, n
inequality: none of us are ruled by reason, all of US bYfiwaSlo
by fear of violent death above all. Reason is only, now avd then,
the servant of our passions.
Now, we "convenant" with ourselves, out of fear Of VlOleNt
death, to give up our right to determ
ine the means of our self-
preservation, and we transfer this right over to the sovereign.
But once this is done, How the sovereign rules is up to the
sovereign. Question: Is Hobbes the realist entitled to offer a
standard of reasonable rule, of how the sovereign OUGHT to rule?
Can we say that the FACT that the sovereign rules comes to the
same as the RIGHT to rule? If we rebelled aga
inst the sovereign,
what would make it unjustified? That our rebellion failed? What
would justify it? That it succeeded? And even if it would be
foolish, would it be "unjust" if the sovereign decided not to
pursue civil peace?