Dialogue in the crisis of representation : realism and antirealism in the context of the conversation between theologians and quantum physicists in Göttingen 1949-1961

The aim of this study is to analyse the content of the interdisciplinary conversations in Göttingen between 1949 and 1961. The task is to compare models for describing reality presented by quantum physicists and theologians. Descriptions of reality indifferent disciplines are conditioned by the development of the concept of reality in philosophy, physics and theology. Our basic problem is stated in the question: How is it possible for the intramental image to match the external object?Cartesian knowledge presupposes clear and distinct ideas in the mind prior to observation resulting in a true correspondence between the observed object and the cogitative observing subject. The Kantian synthesis between rationalism and empiricism emphasises an extended character of representation. The human mind is not a passive receiver of external information, but is actively construing intramental representations of external reality in the epistemological process. Heidegger's aim was to reach a more primordial mode of understanding reality than what is possible in the Cartesian Subject-Object distinction. In Heidegger's philosophy, ontology as being-in-the-world is prior to knowledge concerning being. Ontology can be grasped only in the totality of being (Dasein), not only as an object of reflection and perception. According to Bohr, quantum mechanics introduces an irreducible loss in representation, which classically understood is a deficiency in knowledge. The conflicting aspects (particle and wave pictures) in our comprehension of physical reality, cannot be completely accommodated into an entire and coherent model of reality. What Bohr rejects is not realism, but the classical Einsteinian version of it. By the use of complementary descriptions, Bohr tries to save a fundamentally realistic position. The fundamental question in Barthian theology is the problem of God as an object of theological discourse. Dialectics is Barth¿s way to express knowledge of God avoiding a speculative theology and a human-centred religious self-consciousness. In Barthian theology, the human capacity for knowledge, independently of revelation, is insufficient to comprehend the being of God. Our knowledge of God is real knowledge in revelation and our words are made to correspond with the divine reality in an analogy of faith. The point of the Bultmannian demythologising programme was to claim the real existence of God beyond our faculties. We cannot simply define God as a human ideal of existence or a focus of values. The theological programme of Bultmann emphasised the notion that we can talk meaningfully of God only insofar as we have existential experience of his intervention. Common to all these twentieth century philosophical, physical and theological positions, is a form of anti-Cartesianism. Consequently, in regard to their epistemology, they can be labelled antirealist. This common insight also made it possible to find a common meeting point between the different disciplines. In this study, the different standpoints from all three areas and the conversations in Göttingen are analysed in the frameworkof realism/antirealism. One of the first tasks in the Göttingen conversations was to analyse the nature of the likeness between the complementary structures inquantum physics introduced by Niels Bohr and the dialectical forms in the Barthian doctrine of God. The reaction against epistemological Cartesianism, metaphysics of substance and deterministic description of reality was the common point of departure for theologians and physicists in the Göttingen discussions. In his complementarity, Bohr anticipated the crossing of traditional epistemic boundaries and the generalisation of epistemological strategies by introducing interpretative procedures across various disciplines.

Seedling establishment after prescribed burning of a Clear-Cut and Partially Cut mesic boreal forest in Southern Finland

Summary

Emotions in a Web-based Learning Environment

The aim of this thesis was to examine emotions in a web-based learning environment (WBLE). Theoretically, the thesis was grounded on the dimensional model of emotions. Four empirical studies were conducted. Study I focused on students’ anxiety and their self-efficacy in computer-using situations. Studies II and III examined the influence of experienced emotions on students’ collaborative visible and non-collaborative invisible activities and lurking in a WBLE. Study II also focused on the antecedents of the emotions students experience in a web-based learning environment. Study IV concentrated on clarifying the differences between emotions experienced in face-to-face and web-based collaborative learning. The results of these studies are reported in four original research articles published in scientific journals. The present studies demonstrate that emotions are important determinants of student behaviour in a web-based learning, and justify the conclusion that interactions on the web can and do have an emotional content. Based on the results of these empirical studies, it can be concluded that the emotions students experience during the web-based learning result mostly from the social interactions rather than from the technological context. The studies indicate that the technology itself is not the only antecedent of students’ emotional reactions in the collaborative web-based learning situations. However, the technology itself also exerted an influence on students’ behaviour. It was found that students’ computer anxiety was associated with their negative expectations of the consequences of using technology-based learning environments in their studies. Moreover, the results also indicated that student behaviours in a WBLE can be divided into three partially overlapping classes: i) collaborative visible ii) non-collaborative invisible activities, and iii) lurking. What is more, students’ emotions experienced during the web-based learning affected how actively they participated in such activities in the environment. Especially lurkers, i.e. students who seldom participated in discussions but frequently visited the online environment, experienced more negatively valenced emotions during the courses than did the other students. This result indicates that such negatively toned emotional experiences can make the lurking individuals less eager to participate in other WBLE courses in the future. Therefore, future research should also focus more precisely on the reasons that cause individuals to lurk in online learning groups, and the development of learning tasks that do not encourage or permit lurking or inactivity. Finally, the results from the study comparing emotional reactions in web-based and face-to-face collaborative learning indicated that the learning by means of web-based communication resulted in more affective reactivity when compared to learning in a face-to-face situation. The results imply that the students in the web-based learning group experienced more intense emotions than the students in the face-to-face learning group.The interpretations of this result are that the lack of means for expressing emotional reactions and perceiving others’ emotions increased the affectivity in the web-based learning groups. Such increased affective reactivity could, for example, debilitate individual’s learning performance, especially in complex learning tasks. Therefore, it is recommended that in the future more studies should be focused on the possibilities to express emotions in a text-based web environment to ensure better means for communicating emotions, and subsequently, possibly decrease the high level of affectivity. However, we do not yet know whether the use of means for communicating emotional expressions via the web (for example, “smileys” or “emoticons”) would be beneficial or disadvantageous in formal learning situations. Therefore, future studies should also focus on assessing how the use of such symbols as a means for expressing emotions in a text-based web environment would affect students’ and teachers’ behaviour and emotional state in web-based learning environments.

The Child Occupational Self Assessment (COSA, version 2.1) : lasten toimintamahdollisuuksien itsearviointi COSA:n esittely ja suomentamisprosessi

Tämän opinnäytetyön tarkoituksena on aloittaa lapsille ja nuorille suunnatun The Child Occupational Self Assessment (COSA, version 2.1) itsearviointimenetelmän suomenkielisen version käännöstyö. COSA on asiakaslähtöinen itsearviointi, jolla kartoitetaan lasten ja nuorten kokemusta toiminnallisesta pätevyydestään ja jokapäiväisten toimintojen tärkeydestä heille. COSA pohjaa Inhimillisen toiminnan malliin ja sen toteutus seuraa asiakaslähtöistä teoriaa. COSA:n avulla voidaan asettaa toimintaterapialle tavoitteet ja tarkastella niiden toteutumista. Työssämme suomennamme arviointimenetelmän nimen muotoon; Lasten toimintamahdollisuuksien itsearviointi COSA. Arviointimenetelmän käännöstyö tehdään Helsingin ammattikorkeakoulu Stadian toimintaterapian koulutusohjelmalle. Opinnäytetyössä esittelemme ensin arviointia ja tavoitteiden asettamista lasten toimintaterapiassa sekä itsearvioinnin käyttämistä arviointimenetelmänä. Esittelemme COSA itsearviointimenetelmän sekä sen taustalla vaikuttavat Inhimillisen toiminnan mallin sisällön ja asiakaslähtöisyyden. Kartoitamme myös The Child Occupational Self Assessment (COSA, version 2.1 )itsearviointimenetelmän kehittymistä, sitä edeltäneitä arviointimenetelmiä ja COSA:sta aiemmin tehtyjä tutkimuksia. Opinnäytetyössä suomennamme COSA:n arviointilomakkeen. Arviointilomakkeessa on 25 lasten ja nuorten toiminnallista pätevyyttä ja jokapäiväisten toimintojen tärkeyttä kartoittava väittämää. Suomentamisprosessissa selvitämme COSA:n arviointilomakkeen väittämien suomennosten ymmärrettävyyden onnistumista kahdeksan käyttökokeiluun ja haastatteluun osallistuvan lapsen avulla. Saimme arviointilomakkeen suomentamisprosessiin apua neljältä lasten kanssa työskentelevältä toimintaterapeutilta sekä koulutusohjelmamme koulutuspäälliköltä. Käyttökokeiluiden sekä toimintaterapeuttien palautteiden avulla viimeistelimme suomennetun arviointilomakkeen väittämät. Opinnäytetyön lopuksi pohdimme arviointilomakkeen suomentamisprosessin vaiheita sekä mahdollisia jatkotutkimusehdotuksia. Luovutimme Lasten toimintamahdollisuuksien itsearviointi COSA:n arviointilomakkeen koulutusohjelmamme käyttöön ja mahdollisten jatkotutkimusten kohteeksi.