Maaseutuopistoista Yliopistoon : Maatalous- ja metsätieteiden tutkimus- ja opetustoiminnan akatemisoitumisprosessi Helsingin Yliopistossa vuoteen 1945

From Provincial Institutes to the University. The Academisation Process of the Research and Teaching of Agricultural and Forest Sciences at the University of Helsinki before 1945. This study focuses on the teaching and research conducted in the Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry at the University of Helsinki, as well as in its predecessor, the Section of Agriculture and Economics before 1945. The study falls into the field of university history. Its key research question is the academisation process, an example of which is the academisation process of the teaching and research of agricultural and forest sciences in Finland. From a perspective of university history, the study looks at academisation as the beginning of university-level teaching and research in these fields, or their relocation to a university or another institute of university standing. In addition to the above, the academisation process also includes the establishment of the position of the subjects and their acceptance as part of university activity. Academic closure, on the other hand, prevents the academisation of new subjects. In Finland, the preliminary stage of the academisation of the research and teaching of the agriculture and forestry was the Age of Utility, when questions concerning the subjects became part of clerical and civil service training at the Royal Academy of Turku in the mid-18th century. In the mid-19th century, as a result of social and economic development, agricultural and forestry professionals needed more theoretical professional training. At that time, the Imperial Alexander University was focused on traditional professional training and theoretical education, so, because of this academic closure, practical training for agronomists and foresters was organised at first outside the University at the Mustiala Agricultural Institute and the Evo Forest Institute. In the late 19th century, discussion began on the reform of higher agricultural and forestry education. This led, from the 1890s, to the academisation of higher agricultural and forestry education and research at the Alexander University. Academisation was followed by a transitional stage, during which the work of the Section of Agriculture and Economics, which had begun in 1902, became more established in about 1910. The position of the agricultural and forest sciences was, however, largely temporary, because of the planned Agricultural University. A sign of this establishment and of the rise in scientific status of the subjects was the commencement of operations of the Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry in 1924. Furthermore, as a consequence of the development of the subjects and the collapse of the Agricultural University project, agricultural and forest sciences gradually began to be accepted at the University of Helsinki from the end of the 1920s. This led to the allocation of sites for the faculty buildings and research farms, and to the building of ‘Metsätalo’ before the Second World War. Key words: academisation, academisation process, academic closure, university history, University of Helsinki, Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry, agricultural sciences, forest sciences, agronomy training, forestry training

Ethics and Aesthetics : Intersections in Iris Murdoch's Philosophy

The study addresses the question concerning the relationship between ethics and aesthetics in the philosophy of Iris Murdoch. The main argument is that Murdoch s philosophy cannot be accurately understood without an understanding of the relationship she sees between the aesthetic experience and morality. Reading Murdoch s philosophy with this relationship in mind shows that it must be considered as a relevant alternative to the main forms of aesthetic-ethical theories. The study consists of seven previously published articles and a summary. It shows that Murdoch belongs to a tradition of philosophers who seek to broaden the scope of ethics by reference to aesthetic value and aesthetic experience. She sees an attitude responsible for aesthetic experiences as relevant for morality. However, she does not collapse morality into aesthetic experience. The two meet on the level of the subject s attitude towards its object, but there is a distinction between the experiences that accompany the attitudes. Aesthetic experiences can function as a clue to morals in that they present in a pleasing manner moral truths which otherwise might be psychologically too difficult to face. Murdoch equates the aesthetic attitude with virtuous love characterized by unselfish attention to its object. The primary object of such love is in Murdoch s account another human individual in her particularity. She compares the recognition of the other person as a particular existence to the experience of the Kantian sublime and offers her own version of the true sublime which is the experience of awe in the face of the infinity of the task of understanding others. One of the most central claims in Murdoch s philosophy is that human consciousness is evaluatively structured. This claim challenges the distinction between facts and values which has had an immense influence on modern moral philosophy. One argument with which Murdoch supports her claim is the nature of great literature. According to her, the standard of greatness in literature is the authors awareness of the independent existence of individuals in the particularity of their evaluative consciousnesses. The analysis of the standard of greatness in literature is also Murdoch s only argument for the claim that the primary object of the loving unselfish attention is the other particular individual. She is convinced that great literature reveals a deep truth about the human condition with its capacity to capture the particular. Abstract philo¬sophical discourse cannot compete with this capacity but it should take truths revealed by literature seriously in its theorising. Recognising this as Murdoch s stand on the question of the relation between philosophy and literature as forms of human discourse settles whether she is part of what has been called philosophy s turn to literature. The answer is yes.