I found it easier to see the connection between the course and this week's theme than the past themes. Theory feels like a relevant topic in our education and especially before writing a master thesis. To me it was very interesting reflecting upon what theory is and how to put it into words. I really appreciated the seminar when we discussed about theory and different kinds of theories used in the articles we've read. I still think the term theory is a bit abstract and sometimes a bit hard to understand. Theory is easy to mix with hypothesis and therefor I think it's confusing. But after the seminar today when I've heard other student's thought and explanations I feel I have a better idea of what theory is.
What I really liked the most at the seminar was the idea of creating and writing together by updating the course wiki on KTH social. When we did this it got me thinking on how different we perceive things and how we make up ideas and explanations to understand complicated things. I realized this when we read the course wiki on What is theory?. When reading this text I thought it consisted of a lot of fancy non-meaning words, words that sounds complicated but didn't actually contribute to understanding what theory is. Maybe I started thinking of this since we a couple of minutes earlier defined a theory called Naïve Theory on the other course wiki; Examples of theories. This theory really interested me since it's something everybody does everyday when taking in new information. It's probably why we have different ideas and thoughts about things. I think this could be the cause of many misunderstandings since the way I perceive something doesn't have to correlate with how another person perceive the same thing. Further more, if we then make up a naive idea about the situation and about what we just perceived to understand it better we'll probably not end up with the same idea at all.
I find this Naïve Theory especially present in media. Something happens and a journalist is there to observe the situation he makes up his idea of what happens and then make it in to an article. People like you and me read the article and make up our own naive ideas about the situation. I think the media is an excessive example since media is trying to make headlines to sell more newspapers and draw peoples attention. But it is fascinating how often this happens and how difficult it is to let go of our own ideas even though we find out that the data about the situation was incorrect.
I feel that this week's theme got my thoughts spinning in different directions. The thing I'm going to keep in mind from this week is how important a good and well explained theory is in an article. In the article I read this week the author didn't use theories to her advantage which made the article loose credibility. So I'm going to keep in mind to use theories in a good way in the future when I'm writing an article.
I agree with you. I also found the naive theory, which you brought up at our seminar, very interesting. It is something we all have experienced but not really put in words to define.
SvaraRaderaJust like you say, a message will be interpreted very differently by individual receivers; according to their background knowledge, mood, stress level etc. If you want to be sure that what is received is what you intend it to be you need to weigh your words carefully. It is never the less very easy to forget when you yourself find something very clear and obvious. Try explaining the times tables to a five year old.
As you say, media are experts at using this for their own purposes. We should always try to remember, and be critical about this fact before we believe something we read on the headlines.