IB Core Theme Stimulus ideas - 'Spectre' (2015)

After recently watching the 24th James Bond film 'Spectre' (2015) for the first time since seeing it in the cinema last year, I was struck by a scene which focused, albeit briefly, on the theme of identity. As I teach the IB Philosophy Core Theme ('Being Human') course, I am constantly on the lookout for brief film scenes and literature extracts that allow my students to engage with the Core Theme topics: human nature, personhood, mind and body, the self and the other, freedom and identity.

The interrogation scene from Spectre makes for a good Core Theme-style stimulus. Blofeld has Bond primed and ready for torture whilst Madeleine Swann watches on. Blofeld turns to Madeleine and says:

As you know all too well, dear Madeleine, a man lives inside his head. That's where the seat of his soul is.

Now, James and I were both present recently when a man was

deprived of his eyes. And the most astonishing thing happened.

Didn't you notice?

He wasn't there anymore.

He'd gone even though he was still alive. So in this brief moment

between life and death, there was nobody inside his skull.

Most odd.

I have had some excellent conversations with my IB students about the philosophical themes from this scene. These discussions are particularly useful in the run-up to their examinations.

The Leveson Report

Here is Lord Leveson's speech outlining the findings of his controversial Inquiry into the culture, practices and ethics of the press. The speech was delivered on Thursday 29 November

If you wish to view the report in full (over 2,000 pages!), click here for Volume 1, here for Volume 2, here for Volume 3 and here for Volume 4.

It's likely that many won't have the time to read all 2,000 pages of the four volumes, so a handy executive summary was printed (click here) and makes for very interesting reading.

This has been an examination of British media ethics and has raised many difficult questions: Where next for the press? Are Leveson's suggestions an attack on free speech? Is regulation needed?


For more information on and reaction to the Leveson Report, RS Matters recommends:
BBC iPlayer for Question Time (featuring ex-NOTW reporter Neil Wallis and phone-hacking victim Charlotte Church) and Have I Got News For You
4OD for Hugh Grant: Taking on the Tabloids

Follow RS Matters on Twitter at @RSMatters

Today's the Day.... #Leveson

"The press provides an essential check on all aspects of public life. That is why any failure within the media affects all of us. At the heart of this Inquiry, therefore, may be one simple question: who guards the guardians?" (Lord Leveson, 14 Nov 2011)

Today is the day Lord Justice Brian Leveson releases his findings (nearly 2,000 pages worth!) about the Culture, Practice and Ethics of the Press. The Inquiry began in November 2011 following the revelations of extensive phone-hacking and journalism malpractice and ended in June this year.

At 1.30pm, the report will be made public, and will be followed by a debate in Parliament. It is believed that the Coalition is divided in their response to the findings of the Inquiry, with Cameron and Clegg apparently issuing different statements in the Commons today. Over the last few days, politicians and journalists on all sides of the political spectrum have publicly voiced their opinions, fears, thoughts about what the outcomes of Leveson's report might be. The Spectator newspaper has declared that they will not adhere to any state press regulatory system. What will the reaction of British media organisations and journalists come this evening?

Follow RS Matters on Twitter (@RSMatters) for all the latest news during the day about Lord Leveson's findings.

Background Reading: The Leveson Inquiry

The Leveson Inquiry has today heard its last submissions of evidence. Lord Leveson and his team will now consider all the evidence and reach their conclusions by the end of the year, whatever they may be. Over 450 witnesses have appeared before the Inquiry, which has examined the ethics and methods of the press, the relationships between news proprietors and politicians, the press and the public. The story has dominated the headlines for the last eight months, questioning chiefs of the Metropolitan police, the heads of News International and other media outlets as well as government ministers and even the PM himself.

To help you understand some of the background to the Inquiry and the practices of the media over the last twenty years, here is a list of titles we think provide excellent material for matters of media ethics and questions about freedom of speech.

In You Can’t Read This Book, the Observer columnist Nick Cohen examines the prevalence of censorship in the media, which is at odds with our perceptions that we live in an age of unrivalled freedom. The Salman Rushdie affair, for example, has made publishers reluctant to release material that might be seen as inflammatory, whilst the strict libel laws and expensive injunctions in England are preventing important stories from being reported.

Nick Davies’ Flat Earth News, which formed part of his testimony to the Leveson Inquiry, is a critique of the commercialism of news, turning journalism into what he calls ‘Churnalism’. This includes an overreliance on the news agencies like Reuters and AP, as well as the influx of PR into articles, all of which lead to a dangerous amount of misinformation in the global news media. His examinations into the development of the ‘Millennium Bug’ fear and the reporting on heroin and the ‘War on Drugs’ are both worth reading.

  

Media Lens is an excellent website which analyses media output and was established by David Cromwell and David Edwards. It aims to highlight examples of omission or bias by members of the British media. Media Lens provides a weekly e-mail Media Alert which alerts readers to examples of media bias or poor reporting in the headlines the previous week.

Tom Watson MP and Martin Hickman wrote Dial M for Murdoch in the aftermath of the hacking scandal and during the Leveson Inquiry testimony. Watson MP was one of the figureheads of the campaign to learn more about the true extent of phone-hacking and was the politician who compared News International to a ‘mafia’ organisation. The book has only recently been released and is probably the most up-to-date account of News International and phone-hacking. Watch Watson in action questioning James Murdoch at a Commons Select Committee:

These books and blogs tend to dwell on the negative aspects of the global media, but this is not true of all media. There are excellent journalists out there, and some of their accounts make for interesting reading. Andrew Marr’s My Trade provides an informative account of the history of British journalism. Jon Snow’s Shooting History or Robert Fisk’s The Great War of Civilisation are both excellent accounts, as is John Pilger’s Investigative Journalism and its Triumphs.

If you wish to read the transcripts from the hearings of the Leveson Inquiry, they are all available on the Inquiry’s website here.

A Guide to the Gay Marriage Debate

Article written by Tom Nash

So what’s the fuss all about?

Currently in the UK, same-sex couples who wish to get married cannot do so legally. There have been increasing efforts by LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transsexual) campaigners to legalise same-sex marriage, and petition the government to change the law. In Scotland the debate has been going on for some time, whilst in the rest of the UK it’s still in its infancy.

Can’t homosexual couples already get married?

No, if you are a gay couple you are allowed to enter into a civil partnership. Those who are in a civil partnership have the same rights as a married, heterosexual couple (such as inheritance rules, tax laws and residence to foreign citizens). However, they are not ‘married’.

So why bother campaigning if you already have the same rights as a married couple? What’s the point?

The point is that if you are a religious couple that believe in God and want to get married in a church, you are unable to do so. Churches are currently not allowed to hold marriage ceremonies if they wish to. Therefore if you want to get married, you are discriminated against because of your sexuality.

But what’s the definition of marriage?

The Oxford English Dictionary defines marriage as, “The formal union between a man and a woman, typically as recognised by law, by which they become husband and wife”. The Bible also states this. In addition, it emphasises that marriage is a pathway to having children and raising a family in God’s name.

So by that definition, two men or two women can’t get married? They would also be unable to naturally have a child, unlike a heterosexual couple?

Yes, but many campaigners argue that the definition given by the Bible is not appropriate in today’s society. Many gay couples can already adopt and raise a ‘family’, if not in a traditional sense. We live in an era that supports homosexuality and encourages inclusivity, and it seems wrong that we are still using an old definition. An alternative, more encompassing definition would be to say that marriage is a union of two people who love each other and wish to spend the rest of their lives supporting each other. This definition would therefore allow gay couples to be married.

Surely you cannot be a Christian if you ignore what the Bible says though?

This is a tough one for Christians, and indeed for every religion. Yet most Christians ignore sections in the Bible that do not seem plausible or relevant. Very few Christians, for example, believe that the earth really was created in seven days by God.  Christian supporters also argue that the main message of Jesus and Christianity itself is one of love and forgiveness. They reason that same-sex marriage is something God would approve of. However, many would argue that there is a line to be drawn. Should Christians not believe that Jesus rose from the dead, because the Bible is an unreliable source? This is why some Christians oppose same-sex marriage, because they believe it strays too far from the Bible’s teachings. But it is a debate still being held to this day.

So if same-sex marriage is legalised, will all churches be forced to comply to the law?

Not at all.  The Scottish and the UK government, as well as campaigning groups, have made it clear that only those religious bodies that wished to introduce the ceremonies would have them. Any church that has a religious objection will not be forced to hold same-sex marriages. However, there is concern amongst some religious figures that both governments will not keep their word.

What’s the view of the Church of England, the Church of Scotland and the Catholic Church?

All oppose gay marriage. Both the Catholic Church and the Church of Scotland have been clear in their disapproval for some time, whilst the Church of England has only recently ruled against supporting the movement. However, there are some in all churches who oppose these views and argue for a change in the law.

So who does support same-sex marriage?

Various groups and people. Church and faith groups include The Humanist Society of Scotland, The Scottish Unitarian Association and the Jewish Gay and Lesbian Group. Celebrities and politicians include Stephen Fry, Daniel Radcliffe, and most recently (and controversially for some Americans), Barack Obama.

What about political parties?

In Scotland all major parties (SNP, Labour, Conservatives and Lib Dems) have pledged their commitment to same-sex marriage.  The SNP’s position is somewhat complex however, as they are funded and supported by many Catholics and out-spoken critics of the proposals.  In the Westminster government, both Labour and the Lib Dems support the proposals. David Cameron proclaimed his support for the movement in 2011, and many influential Tories such as Theresa May have joined him. However, other major figures like Philip Hammond have openly disagreed, and Tory backbenchers are generally unhappy with the idea.

What’s going to happen next?

It’s hard to predict! Polls in Scotland and the UK seem to show that the majority of people agree that it should be legalised. In Scotland the consultation period has ended, so it is now up to the government to announce what will happen. A decision was supposed to have been announced several days ago, but instead the government pushed back the decision until later in the month, leading many to fear that it may be some time before anything happens. The consultation period has also ended in the UK, but it may take some time before any action is taken.

About Tom Nash: I am a 2nd Year History student at the University of Edinburgh. I am also an elected member of Edinburgh University Students' Association (EUSA), and have campaigned for same-sex marriage in the past. Follow me on Twitter: @TomCNash

The Call to Prayer

I am a Manchester United fan, yet have long held a soft spot for Bolton Wanderers. This is partly because we share a name, but it is mainly down to the fact that I once went to the Reebok Stadium to watch them play against Sunderland back in 2002 in an FA Cup game. Their attitude and style of play was and has continued to have been positive. This season has been tough for them, but on Saturday it got tougher when midfielder Fabrice Muamba collapsed during the Trotters’ FA Cup Quarter Final fixture against Tottenham Hotspur. The game stopped, the doctors and paramedic staff rushed out onto the pitch, knowing something was not right. Referee Howard Webb rightly abandoned the fixture, and an anxious wait for the players, the Bolton fans and the football community began.

It was soon revealed that Muamba has suffered a cardiac arrest. On Sunday afternoon, tributes to Muamba included a round of applause at the Man Utd-Wolves Premier League game. At the Chelsea-Leicester FA Cup fixture, Gary Cahill, formerly of Bolton Wanderers, scored for the Blues and unveiled a message on his T-shirt, ‘Pray 4 Muamba’. On Monday, The Sun ran the headlines ‘God is in Control’ and ‘Pray for Muamba’. The Daily Telegraph sports section was fronted by a picture of Gary Cahill’s dedication to Muamba complete with articles celebrating his professionalism and playing ability as well as praising the efforts of the paramedics. The paper also published numerous messages from Twitter and interviews - Jack Wilshere: ‘Everyone keep praying!’; Wayne Rooney: ‘praying for him and his family’; Justin Hoyte: ‘Please keep fmuamba in ur prayers’; Stuart Holden: ‘Praying for you Fab’; Jermaine Defoe: ‘Pray for Fab. God willing he will pull through’; Andrea Pirlo: Muamba is ‘our colleague, we pray he gets well soon’; and, Emmanuel Adebayor: ‘we are all praying for him and hope for a speedy recovery’ (all comments were printed in the Daily Telegraph).

The common theme of these tweets, comments and press reports were the words ‘pray’ and ‘praying’. Tottenham defender Kyle Walker tweeted: ‘Doesn’t matter who you support [or] if you aren’t a football fan. Doesn’t matter if you aren’t religious. Pray for Fabrice Muamba’. A dedicated professional, Muamba has a bright future and will hopefully be able to return to first class action. The collapse must have been shocking to witness, and it brought back painful memories of players Marc-Vivien Foé and Antonio Puerta who had died after heart attacks on the pitch. The call to prayer is interesting, and is understandable – ‘prayer’ as a concept has taken on an everyday meaning – some might pray that they will do well in exams or that their football team will win the title, yet do so without having religious belief. In these contexts, ‘to pray’ becomes a stronger way of saying ‘to hope/to will/to want/to wish’. There will obviously be many who will pray for Muamba’s successful recovery who do so with belief in the divine, yet when newspapers such as The Sun and The Daily Telegraph place so much focus on prayer, it would seem that they were appealing to an audience beyond those with faith.

The BBC’s Home Editor Mark Easton published an interesting article (Prayers for Muamba) on Monday, highlighting various studies and surveys undertaken by the likes of Sir Francis Galton and the BBC on the effectiveness of prayer.  Such studies are contentious, and it is unclear how or if one could quantify the effects of prayer if someone has been healed or if a prayer appears to have been answered. Is it divine intercession, good medicine or strong willpower? Maybe it is a combination of the three? Galton’s 1872 study was influenced by his thought that ‘if praying was effective, then monarchs should live longer than comparable groups’ (Easton) due to commonly spoken phrases such as ‘God Save the King/Queen’. His research found that men of the gentry lived to roughly 70 years on average, whilst the lowest average (of around 64 years) belonged to the male members of royalty. Galton concluded that “the sovereigns are literally the shortest-lived of all who have the advantage of influence. The prayer has, therefore, no efficacy.” This survey is not flawless, and I doubt that those who belief in the power of prayer would take it to heart. Prayer is a key part of religious ritual and practice, as demonstrated in the 5 prayers a day undertaken by Muslims, the congregation getting to their feet in a Catholic service to proclaim the ‘Our Father’ or the quiet prayer one might recite before bedtime. It is perhaps the most personal aspect of faith – a sense of talking to or praising the divine on a one-to-one basis or as a community.

What have the events from and since Saturday revealed about the UK? Well, for a start, we have seen that football, so often criticised, has a conscience and can bring out the very best in people. This has been seen in the actions of Owen Coyle and Phil Gartside accompanied and stayed with Muamba in hospital, the paramedics who rushed to his attention, the fans who showed support for the decision to abandon the game, the referee Howard Webb who realised that the game could not continue, and the FA for allowing Bolton’s midweek game with Aston Villa to be indefinitely postponed. It often takes a horrible accident for the best in people to emerge and in a sport recently tarnished with racist abuse, sectarian troubles, corruption and poor governance it is easy to ignore the spirit that keeps the beautiful game beautiful. There is a universal language of football, infecting people from all over the globe. I was once fortunate enough to go on a tour around the Galapagos and whilst having dinner with my family and the Ecuadorian boat captain, we talked about football for almost all the meal. He was delighted to know that we were United fans, as Ecuadorian Antonio Valencia had just signed for the Red Devils.

The comments have also demonstrated show how religious language has influenced our own language. This is hardly surprising: the translation into English and the famous King James Bible edition have had a marked effect on the English language, with phrases and terminology shaping and consolidating the language, ending the dominance of Latin and aiding the shift from Catholic to Protestant Britain. Benedict Anderson has written extensively on the subject, calling it the process of print capitalism, which helps establish nations and feelings of Englishness. Print capitalism and the development of the English language, meant that Latin lost its monopoly on print as works were gradually published and made available in the vernacular. Books, newspapers and novels, written in the vernacular, allowed their readers to realise that there existed a ‘horizontal comradeship’ across society, consuming the same, shared culture. The English language helped create the English, and Christian ideas from the key text, the Bible, pervaded our language.

The effect of Shakespeare on our language has also been influential. Bernard Levin perfectly summed up the impact of the Bard: “If you cannot understand my argument, and declare ``It's Greek to me'', you are quoting Shakespeare; if you claim to be more sinned against than sinning, you are quoting Shakespeare; if you recall your salad days, you are quoting Shakespeare....” (For the rest of the quote, see the video below) If Shakespeare has had such an influence, Biblical language, translated into English, reaching so many people must have had more.

The calls to pray for Muamba in his hour of need, encouraging the public to remember him in their thoughts and prayers does not display or highlight public religiosity, but instead highlights the influence of religion on the shaping and development of the English language and national consciousness. Some will pray for his recovery by asking the divine to help him, whilst some will keep him in their thoughts and encourage others to do the same. Both are valuable, and hopefully both will contribute to his recovery. A dedicated professional and bright hope for the future, Fabrice Muamba will be grateful for the immense level of support he has been and is continuing to be shown. Get well soon Muamba, you are in our thoughts and prayers.

Looking back at February

RS Matters began February with an article on media ethics, entitled Right Speech, the Right to Free Speech and the Rights of the Dead. The article highlighted some of the evidence from the ongoing Leveson Inquiry; in particular, the evidence which focused on the issue of defaming the dead. The testimonies of the Watson family and ex-Daily Star journalist Mr. Richard Peppiatt raised questions over the right to free speech and whether the dead can have the same rights as the living when it comes to libel law.

On 9 February, we discussed what ‘evil’ was and asked what makes actions ‘evil’ in an article entitled Have Your Say: What is Evil? The work of political theorist Hannah Arendt was considered, as well as depictions of evil in literary works like Heart of Darkness and Lord of the Flies. If you wish to contribute to the debate, either comment on the article or e-mail RS Matters at rsmattersblog@gmail.com to have your say on the issue.

We finished February with Debating, not dictating: Why the Religion/State divide appears to be working, an article focusing on Baroness Warsi’s recent comments about the role of faith in society in which she spoke of the dangers of ‘militant secularisation’. After examining the content of her comments, which were published in the Daily Telegraph on February 14, the article looked at the religion-state divine in the UK, comparing it with that of the USA, especially as America sets itself up for the autumnal Presidential election.

As we go into March, please follow or continue to follow RS Matters on Twitter (@RSMatters). If you are a student or enthusiast with a passion for religious studies and philosophy and wish to contribute an article to the site, please send us your work by e-mailing rsmattersblog@gmail.com. We will strive to publish all articles that come in, provided that they have not been written to intentionally cause offence. We welcome all points of view and articles about any aspect of religion, philosophy and ethics.

It was great to recently discover that RS Matters has been viewed across the globe, with readers from the UK, the USA, Canada, France, Germany, Russia, the Ukraine and Brazil. Have a great March and continue to enjoy RS Matters

MB, Editor