Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Zeitgeist. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Zeitgeist. Sort by date Show all posts

Friday, July 23, 2021

Zeitgeist

Zeitgeist (pronounced tsahyt-gahyst)

A German noun, the spirit of the time; general trend of thought or feeling characteristic of a particular period of time, historically especially as reflected in literature and philosophy although now also used to reference popular culture.

1835: From the German, Zeit + Geist, literally "time spirit (or ghost)", a calque of Latin genius sēculī, and best translated as “spirit of the age”.  It’s not commonly pluralized but the plural of Geist (ghost; spirit) is Geister, thus in English the irregular noun zeitgeister (also often in the plural), sometimes used of those who write of the fads in contemporary culture. Zeitgeist is a noun and zeitgeisty, zeitgeistier & zeitgeistiest are adjectives; the (rare) plural is zeitgeists.  Hopefully, zeitgeistesque never becomes a thing.  

Spirit of the age

A concept from eighteenth & nineteenth century German philosophy, best translated as "spirit of the age", it refers to the invisible forces dominating or defining the characteristics of a given epoch in history.  Although now most associated with German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831), especially in contrast with the Hegelian concepts of volksgeist (national spirit) and weltgeist (world-spirit), the coinage predates Hegel and appears in the work of Johann Gottfried Herder (1744–1803), Johann Wolfgang von Goethe ("Goethe"; 1749–1832), Herbert Spencer (1820–1903) and Voltaire (François-Marie Arouet; 1694–1778).  Hegel, in Phenomenology of the Spirit (1807), did write of the idea but preferred the phrase Geist der Zeiten (spirit of the times) over the compound Zeitgeist.  Most sources acknowledge the first documented use being in the writings of Herder.

Portrait of GWF Hegel (circa 1839), steel engraving by Lazarus Gottlieb Sichling (1812–1863) after an aquarel (watercolor) lithograph (1828) by Julius Ludwig Sebbers (circa 1785-1893).

Until recently, zeitgeist tended to be used retrospectively, in the manner of geochronology where an epoch has a known end date before labels are applied.  Of late, with its (perhaps over-enthusiastic) adoption by those who write of pop-culture, it’s come to be attached to just about anything, however fleeting.  Some criticize this but that's probably intellectual snobbery; in a sense Hegel et al were also writing of a type of popular culture.  Appropriately then, zeitgeist should now be considered and English word, having been thoroughly assimilated and not capitalized unless used in a way which references its continental origins (of Hegel, Voltaire etc) in which case it remains German and as a noun picks up an initial capital.  Because it remains both a German and English word, it can be spoken as written or translated, depending on the effect desired and in this it's a variant of the conventions which guide the way written text is handled in oral speech.  Where a word or phrase, however familiar in English, remains foreign it should when spoken, be rendered in translation: the written text “Hillary Clinton is, inter alia, crooked”, is spoken as “Hillary Clinton is, among other things, crooked”.  Where a foreign word or phrase has been assimilated into English it is treated as native so the written text “Hillary Clinton’s statement was the usual mix of lies, half-truths, evasions etc” is spoken as “Hillary Clinton’s statement was the usual mix of lies, half-truths, evasions etcetera.”  Note the usual shortened form (etc) has traditionally always been followed by a full-stop but there is a welcome revisionist movement which argues it too has become an English word (as etcetera is an anglicized form of the Latin et cetera) and thus needs no longer to be treated as a truncation.

Of the zeitgeist, early in the third millennium: Paramount Pictures promotional poster for Mean Girls (2004).

Where a foreign word or phrase, however familiar in English, depends for technical or other reasons on the original form to convey its meaning, it should be spoken as written.  Words of this class are often legal Latin such as obiter dictum (from the Latin and literally "something said in passing and not critically to what's being discussed" and in law describing a judge's expression of opinion not essential to the verdict and thus not binding as a precedent) and habeas corpus (from the Latin habeas corpus ad subjiciendum (literally "You (shall) have the body to be subjected to (examination)" and now a mechanism to challenge the lawfulness of a detention (ie the detainee must be brought before a court).  Status quo (from the Latin status (state) (sometimes used in the ablative statū) + quō (in which), the ablative of quī (which)) is well-known and widely used as kind of verbal shorthand to avoid clumsy English constructions yet the Status Quo is an Ottoman era firman (from the Ottoman Turkish فرمان‎ (ferman), from the Persian فرمان‎ (farmân) (command, order, decree)) which defines certain unchanging understandings among religious communities with respect to nine shared religious sites in Jerusalem and Bethlehem and to translate this to anything else would rob it of the meaning which relies on its historic context.  So, words evolve to be defined as assimilated into English or not according to "rules" which are a bit vague but in use there's probably a consensus things like "obiter dictum" and "habeas corpus" remain ways of expressing something with a foreign phrase because they're still used in their original (legal) context whereas "status quo" has become an English phrase because use is so diverse and distant from its origins.

Tuesday, November 2, 2021

Plausible

Plausible (pronounced plaw-zuh-buhl)

(1) Having an appearance of truth or reason; seemingly worthy of approval or acceptance; credible; believable; possibly or probably true.

(2) Well-spoken and apparently, but often deceptively, worthy of confidence or trust.  Obtaining approbation; specifically pleasing; apparently right; specious.

(3) Worthy of being applauded; praiseworthy; commendable; ready (obsolete).

1535–1545: From the Middle English, from the Latin plausibilis (deserving applause, praiseworthy, acceptable, pleasing), the construct being plausus (past participle of plaudere (to applaud)) + ibilis (ible) (the Latin adjectival suffix (now usually in a passive sense) which creates meanings "able to be, relevant or suitable to, in accordance with" or expressing capacity or worthiness in a passive sense). The meaning "having the appearance of truth" is noted from the 1560s.  The plausible has become nuanced (the comparative more plausible, the superlative most plausible) but synonyms (of the historic meaning) include credible, probable, persuasive, possible, logical, valid, conceivable, tenable, creditable, likely, presumable, sound & supposable.  Plausible is an adjective, plausibly is an adverb, plausibility is a noun; the noun plural is plausibilities (although the antonym implausibilities is probably the more often heard form.

Cynicism is nothing new and in English the meaning "having a specious or superficial appearance of trustworthiness" had been appended as early as the 1560s.  The noun has been documented since the 1590s in the sense of "quality of being worthy of praise or acceptance" although it too was soon co-opted and by at least the 1640s was also used to suggest "a specious or superficial appearance of being right or worthy of acceptance".  The adjective implausible (not having an appearance of truth or credibility) dates from the 1670s although as late as earlier in the century it was still being used in its original sense of "not worthy of applause".  There's a prejudice that "implausible" and related forms are used more often than "plausible" and its relations nut it may simply we we notice the former more and "plausible deniability" is really just a loaded way of saying "implausible".

Plausible Deniability

Plausible deniability is a construct of language to be used in situations where it’s possible to tell lies because it’s not possible for others to prove the truth.  In common law jurisdictions, it exists also as a legal concept given the evidential onus of proof falls (usually) not upon the defendant so if the opponent cannot offer evidence to support an allegation, variously beyond reasonable doubt or on the balance of probabilities, accusations can plausibly be denied regardless of the truth.  Most associated with politicians or public officials but practiced also by those in corporate chains of command, it’s used usually to deny knowledge of or responsibility for anything unlawful, immoral or in some way disreputable.  Depending on the circumstances, it can protect institutions from damage or, more typically, shift blame (and consequences) from someone senior to others lower in the hierarchy.  While the art & science of plausible deniability doubtlessly has been practiced since the origins of humanity, the phrase was coined within the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), apparently as early as the 1950s although it seems not to have appeared in any printed source available to the public until 1964 and became part of general use only during the Watergate crisis (1973-1974).  Some sources credit Allen Dulles (1893–1969; Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) 1953-1961) himself with the first public use but, like his brother (John Foster Dulles (1888–1959; US Secretary of State 1953-1959)), he's blamed for much.

Lindsay Lohan and her lawyer in court, Los Angeles, December 2011.

Within the CIA, it described the withholding of information from senior officials in order to protect them from repercussions in the event that illegal or unpopular activities became public knowledge.  This was a time when the CIA was lawfully permitted to assassinate people, especially uncooperative politicians in troublesome countries.  It's obviously a murky business but the consensus seems to be the CIA still kills people but never uses the word assassination and, dating from an executive order issued by Gerald Ford (1913–2006; US president 1974-1977), the agency is no longer allowed to kill heads of state.  This prohibition was presumably a kind of "professional courtesy" on the part of President Ford and one which he must have hoped would be reciprocated.  It's not difficult to guess which countries definitely have at least one executioner silently on the payroll and which almost certainly don't but most are in that grey area of uncertainty.

Alastair Campbell (b 1957; Downing Street Director of Communications & official spokesperson (1997–2003) rear) with Vladimir Putin (b 1952; Prime-Minister of Russia 1999-2000 & 2008-2012, President of Russia 1999-2008 & since 2012, left) and Tony Blair (b 1953; UK Prime Minister 1997-2007, right).  Mr Putin in recent years has stretched plausible deniability well beyond the point at which plausibility can be said to have become implausible and the not infrequently seen: "cause of death: falling from window of high building" is known by Russians as the "oligarch elevator".  Predating even the Tsarist state, grim humor has a long tradition in Russia.    

One fine practitioner of the art was one-time tabloid journalist Alastair Campbell, spokesman for the New Labour government during most of Tony Blair’s premiership.  Campbell added a post-modern twist in that he dealt mostly with journalists who knew when he was lying and they knew that he knew they knew.  Things evolved to the point where Campbell came to believe this was proof of his cleverness and some suspected he began to lie, even when the truth would have been harmless, just to show-off his cynical contempt for just about everyone else.  It worked for a while and certainly suited the New Labour zeitgeist but later, when employed as press officer for the British & Irish Lions on their 2005 tour of New Zealand, his effectiveness was limited because even when telling the truth, which, in fairness, he often did, the baggage of his past made everything sound like spin and lies.  The Lions lost the test series 3-0, the first time in 22 years they lost every test match on tour but nobody suggested Campbell was in anyway responsible for the on-field performance.  Still, plausibility deniability remains an essential skill in modern media management.  An example would be:

(1) You run a government in some country about which, for a variety of reasons, Western governments tend not to make tiresome complaints.  Here, you can do just about anything you wish.

(2) One of your people has run away to another country and is being really annoying.  You arrange to have him invited home for discussions over a cup of coffee.

(3) They crew sent to issue the invitation botch the job, murdering him in a quite gruesome manner (ie the method not far removed from how they dispatch them on home soil).

(4) You deny it was an execution, suggesting death happened when an argument about football or something became heated.  (Plausible denial #1).

(5) Didn’t work.  You now deny ordering any connection with the operation, saying it was an unauthorized rogue team.  (Plausible denial #2).

(6) The other country lists nineteen suspects involved in the murder and demands extradition for trial.

(7) You work out which of the suspects is most expendable and it's announced he had died in "an accident" (that and "natural causes" often a grey area you've noticed).  You hope the sacrifice will satisfy honor on both sides.  (Plausible denial #3).

(8) Problem isn’t going away, even though kind folks in many countries are helping you try to make it go away.  You have the remaining eighteen suspects arrested and locked-up somewhere reasonably pleasant and most secret.

(9) Other country is still being tiresome, maintaining people who kill others should be tried for murder in country where crime was committed.  You understand the legal point but still can't see what all the fuss is about.

(10) You arrange it to be announced the eighteen suspects are dead, all SWATE (shot while attempting to escape).  (Plausible denial #4).  The system works.

Sunday, June 4, 2023

Font

Font (pronounced font)

(1) In Christianity, a receptacle, usually of stone, as in a baptistery or church, containing the holy water used in baptism (now usually as "fount").

(2) A receptacle for holy water; a stoup (now usually as "fount") .

(3) A productive source (often in the form “a fount of wisdom”).

(4) The reservoir for the oil in a lamp, ink for a pen etc (now usually as "fount").

(5) Figuratively, a spring or fountain; a wellspring (archaic but still appears in poetic & literary use as both "font" & "fount").

(6) In the slang of television production, to overlay text onto the picture.

(7) In typography, a set of glyphs of unified design, belonging to one typeface, style & weight and usually representing the letters of an alphabet, supplementary characters, punctuation marks and the ten standard numerals.

(8) In phototypesetting, a set of patterns forming glyphs of any size, or the film they are stored on.

(9) In digital typesetting, a set of glyphs in a single style, representing one or more alphabets or writing systems, or the computer code representing it.

(10) In computing, a file containing the code used to draw and compose the glyphs of one or more typographic fonts on a display or printer.

Pre 1000: From the Middle English font, from the Old English font & fant, from the Latin font-, the stem of the Church Latin fons baptismalis (baptismal font, spring, fountain) from the Classical Latin fōns (genitive fontis) (fountain).  The use in printing to describe typefaces dates from the 1570s and was from the Old & Middle French fonte (a founding, casting), the feminine past participle of the verb fondre (to melt), from the unattested Vulgar Latin funditus (a pouring, molding, casting), a verbal noun from the Latin fundere (past participle fusus) (to pour a melted substance) from a nasalized form of the primitive Indo-European root gheu- (to pour).  The meaning was acquired because all the characters in a set were cast at the same time.  Most people use the words font and typeface as synonyms but industry professionals maintain a distinction: the typeface is the set of characters of the same design; the font is the physical means of producing them; that difference was maintained even as printing moved from physical wood & metal to electronics.  The modern practice is for the spelling “font” to apply to use in printing while “fount” is use for receptacles containing liquids.  That must seem strange to those learning the language but it’s how things evolved.  Font is a noun & verb, fonted is a verb & adjective, fonting is a verb and fontal is an adjective; the noun plural is fonts.

The politics of fonts

Great moments in fonts: Always select your font with care.

Dr Stephen Banham (b 1968) is a senior lecturer in typography at RMIT University in Melbourne, Australia who has published widely on the subject.  He recently discussed the politics of fonts and offered a number of examples of how fonts have played some significant role in recent history.  He noted the way in which some developments in typefaces have been technologically deterministic, something related not only to the changes in the mechanical devices used in printing (such as the shift from wooden to metal type) but also the speed at which people travelled while reading.  When the development of railways meant people began regularly to travel at speeds beyond that which teams of horses could attain, it meant there was signage which had to be legible to those passing on the train and this was not always simply a matter of scaling-up the existing styles; sometimes new designs were needed with different aspect ratios.

Fonts in transition: Nazi Party poster advertising a “Freedoms Rally” (the irony not apparent at the time), Schneidemuhl, Germany, (now Pila, Poland) in 1931 (left), Edict issued by Martin Bormann (1900–1945) banning the future use of Judenlettern (Jewish fonts) like Fraktur (the irony of the letterhead being in the now banned typeface presumably didn’t disturb the author) (centre) and (in modern Roman script), an announcement in occupied that 100 Polish hostages had been executed as a reprisal for death of two Germans in Warsaw, 1944 (right).

Sometimes too, the message was the typeface itself; it imparted values that were separate from the specific meaning in the text.  The Nazi regime (1933-1945) in Germany was always conscious of spectacle and although in matters of such as architecture customs there was a surprising tolerance of regional difference, in some things it demanded uniformity and one of those was the appearance of official documents.  Early in his rule their rule, Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader), German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) decreed that “German Black Letter” should be used for all official purposes (and it was used in the cover art of most early editions of Mein Kampf); Hitler, who to the end thought himself an “artist”, liked the heavy, angular form for its encapsulation of the Germanic.  Fraktur is probably the best known of these although it’s but one of a number of variations of the typeface and such was the extend of the state support for the font that the party was critical of newspapers, publishers & magazines which used more modern (and easier to read) forms (and they were used by the German military and civil service when legibility was important), a frequent criticism being the “Roman characters” somehow represented a “Jewish influence”.  In one of the ironies of history however, when it became apparent that when used in letters and notices distributed to enforce rule in the occupied territories the use of the font was counter-productive because it was so hard to read, the Nazis suddenly declared that Fraktur had become contaminated wand was thus proscribed as Judenlettern (Jewish letters), official documents thereafter rendered in modern Roman type.  Martin Bormann's edict was issued thus:

I announce the following, by order of the Führer:

It is false to regard the so-called Gothic typeface as a German typeface. In reality, the so-called Gothic typeface consists of Schwabacher-Jewish letters. Just as they later came to own the newspapers, the Jews living in Germany also owned the printing presses… and thus came about the common use in Germany of Schwabacher-Jewish letters.

Today the Führer… decided that Antiqua type is to be regarded as the standard typeface. Over time, all printed matter should be converted to this standard typeface. This will occur as soon as possible in regard to school textbooks, only the standard script will be taught in village and primary schools. The use of Schwabacher-Jewish letters by authorities will in future cease. Certificates of appointment for officials, street signs and the like will in future only be produced in standard lettering…

In the post war years, fonts (the word had come by them to be used generically of typefaces except by printers) reflected the mood of the times and in the unexpectedly buoyant years of the 1950s there emerged in West Germany (the FRG) “Optima”, (1958) intended to convey the optimism engendered by the Wirtschaftswunder (the economic miracle) while in France, “Univers” (1957), the product of a Swiss designer, was in a similar vein and intended to be suitable for all purposes in all languages.  Doubtlessly though, no font compares with the Swiss "Helvetica" (1957) which, by virtue of its elegance, simplicity & adaptability, quickly enjoyed a popularity which endures to this day and it remains the only font which has been the subject of a full-length feature film.  It spawned a number of imitators, especially after it was included in Adobe’s PostScript set, the best known of which is probably the ubiquitous Arial (1982).  The optimism of the 1950s is long gone although Optima remains available and names still reflect something of the concerns of their era: “Exocet” (1981), “Stealth” (1983) and “Patriot” (1986) all part of the late Cold War Zeitgeist.  Fonts can also reflect environment concerns and there are now some which no longer use solid forms, instead being made of lines, thereby reducing the consumption of ink or toner by up to 12%.  The trick isn’t detectable by the naked eye and is actually not new, “outline” typefaces long available although in those the technique was designed to be apparent and there were limitations in their application; below a certain size they tended to fragment.

More great moments in fonts.

During the Covid-19 pandemic when we were all spend much time in a form of house arrest, the font download sites all noted a spike in demand for script-like fonts, especially those which most resembled handwriting (and it is possible to have one’s own handwriting rendered as a font), the demand presumed to be induced by a longing for a way to express feelings in a more “human” way than the default serif and san serif sets which ship with email and messenger services.  That over arching binary (serif & san serif) has also attracted criticism because humanity’s most obvious binary (male & female) in now under siege as a form of oppression so binaries in general seem no longer fashionable.  With fonts, the most obvious micro-aggression is the way fonts are often categorized as “masculine” (Arial; Verdana etc) and “feminine” (Brush Script; Comic Sans (maybe in fuchsia) etc) and though the relevant characteristics can’t exactly be defined (except for the fuchsia), the differences probably can be recognized although that of course is a product of the prejudices and suppositions of the observer.  Presumably, if offered a third category (gender-neutral), a sample group would put some fonts in there but even that would seem based on the prejudices and suppositions constructed by the original binary.  The mechanics (as opposed to the content) of typology is one of the less expected theatres of the culture wars.

Verzoening, Geffen, the Netherlands.

The simultaneously derided yet still popular font Comic Sans (1984) has been more controversial than most.  The design was intended to recall the sort of writing which appeared in the speech bubbles of cartoons and it first came to wide public attention in 1995 when it was used in Microsoft Bob, the software which was an attempt to use a cartoon-like interface to make navigating Windows 95 easier for neophytes.  Even less popular than Windows Me, Windows Vista or DOS 4.0, Bob was allowed quietly to die but Comic Sans survived and found a niche, much to the disgust of some in major corporations who banned its use, demanding the staff use only “dignified” or “serious” (presumably masculine) fonts rather than something from a comic book.  Unfortunately, this news appeared not to reach whoever it was in the Netherlands who in 2012 approved the use of Comic Sans on the World War II memorial Verzoening (Reconciliation) erected in the town of Geffen.  That attracted much criticism but not as much as the decision to have the names of Jewish, Allied and German military deaths all to be etched (in Comic Sans) on the same stone.  After it was pointed out that reconciliation with the SS was not a national sentiment, the offending names were removed although for the rest, Comic Sans remained, albeit modified by the stonemasons so the text was rendered thicker, the local authorities justifying the retention on the grounds the shape of the text was in accord with the stone (it’s difficult to see the connection) and easily legible at a distance (certainly true).  It may be the only monument in the world, dedicated to the dead, which uses Comic Sans.

Crooked Hillary Clinton updating her Burn Book which, during the primary campaign for the Democrat Party nomination for the 2016 presidential election, probably would have been referred to internally as her "Bern Book" because it would have been so filled with tactics designed to sabotage the campaign of Bernie Sanders (b 1941; senior US senator (Independent, Vermont) since 2007) (digitally altered image).  In Mean Girls (2004), the Burn Book's cover used the "ransom note" technique which involved physically cutting letters from newspapers & magazines and pasting them onto a page, a trick of the pre-DNA analysis age which left no identifiable handwriting.  There are a number of "ransom" fonts which emulate the appearance in software.

Politicians do maintain burn books although few are much discussed.  Richard Nixon's (1913-1994; US president 1969-1974) "enemies list" became famous in 1973 when it emerged during congressional hearings enquiring into the Watergate break-in and that such a list existed surprised few although some did expect it to contain more names than the twenty included; it was common knowledge Nixon had many more enemies than that.  That view was vindicated when later lists were revealed (some containing hundreds of names) though had the net been cast a little wider, it could well have run to thousands.  At least one Eurocrat has also admitted to keeping a burn book although Jean-Claude Juncker (b 1954; president of the European Commission 2014-2019) calls his "little black book" Le Petit Maurice (little Maurice), the name apparently a reference to a contemporary from his school days who grew taller than the youthful Jean-Claude and seldom neglected to mention it.  Although maintained for some thirty years (including the eighteen spent as prime-minister of Luxembourg) to record the identities of those who crossed him, Mr Junker noted with some satisfaction it wasn't all that full because people “rarely betray me”, adding “I am not vengeful, but I have a good memory.”   It seems his warning “Be careful.  Little Maurice is waiting for you” was sufficient to ward of the betrayal and low skulduggery for which the corridors of EU institutions are renowned.

Sunday, November 24, 2024

Weltanschauung

Weltanschauung (pronounced velt-ahn-shou-oong)

A worldview.

1868 (in English): From the German Weltanschauung, the construct being Welt (world) + anschauung (view, conception, perception).  Welt was from the Middle High German wëlt, an assimilative contraction of the older wërlt, from the Old High German weralt, from Proto-the West Germanic weraldi, from the Proto-Germanic weraldiz; it was cognate to the English world, the Dutch wereld and the Swedish värld.  Anschauung was from the Middle High German anschouwunge, a calque of the Latin vīsiō (seeing, sight, vision, view); the construct being ansch(auen) (to look at; to behold; to observe (visually); to view) + (a phonetic) -ouwu- + -ung (the suffix used to form nouns from verbs).  Weltanschauung is a noun and weltanschaulich is an adjective; the noun plural is plural Weltanschauungen.

In English, the word is used as an un-adapted borrowing from the German (although often without the initial capital German nouns demand), the descendants from the German in other languages including the Afrikaans wêreldbeskouing (calque), the Bulgarian светоглед (svetogled) (calque), the Estonian maailmavaade (calque), the Finnish maailmankatsomus (calque), the Hungarian világnézet (calque), the Japanese 世界観 (calque), the Chinese 世界觀/世界观 (shìjièguān), the Korean 세계관 (segyegwan), the Vietnamese thế giới quan, the Polish światopogląd (calque), the Romanian weltanschauung, the Russian мировосприя́тие (mirovosprijátije) (calque), the Swedish världsåskådning (calque) and the Ukrainian світосприйняття́ (svitospryjnjattjá) (calque).

One of those compound nouns at which Germans excel in forming, Weltanschauung seems first to have been used by Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) in Kritik der Urteilskraft (Critique of Judgment (1790)).  Kant used the word (which translates literally as “worldview”) to describe the capacity of man to achieve a unified perspective on the world; to illustrate the concept he referenced the matter of aesthetic judgment and the contemplation of nature, emphasizing how aesthetic experience enables people to form a coherent and meaningful view of the world as a whole.  For Kant, a Weltanschauung was essential were an individual to experience the sublime and the role of imagination & reason in aesthetic experience but the term doesn’t dominate the text, acting instead as a kind of structural underpinning, providing the framework with which people can move beyond fragmented sensory impressions to grasp a harmonious vision of nature and the cosmos.  For Kant, the very purpose of philosophy was a uniting of the faculties of understanding, reason, and sensibility, itself a worldview which makes his work at once so rewarding and so difficult.

His examples though were compellingly simple: It was through encounters with the sublime (the stars above, the deep forest, the grandeur of the mountains etc) that humans could transcend their limited empirical experiences and begin to sense unity and order (though perhaps not purpose, Kant inclined to sit on the fence on that one) in nature.  Importantly though, Kant did explain this was a serious business and one’s Weltanschauung was a thing to be arrived at through a process of reflecting upon the relationship between humanity, nature and the infinite; it was not something upon which one just stumbled.  So it was a matter of human imagination and reason operating together to synthesize sensory data and from this process would emerge a conception of universal principles: the world as an ordered and meaningful whole.  Kant not only asked much from the universe, he expected much from us.

Lindsay Lohan and her lawyer in court, Los Angeles, December 2011.

Despite his reputation (especially, one imagines, among puzzled students), Kant was not devoted to abstractions and was a practical philosopher; his intent was to write the sort of texts the philosophers of antiquity might have produced in an attempt to help people live better lives.  Kant wrote with moral and sometimes teleological themes and he was a great influence on later German philosophers including Wilhelm Dilthey (1833–1911), Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900) and Martin Heidegger (1889–1976)) and it was his use of Weltanschauung in Critique of Judgment which provided the early foundation for the term.  His focus was on neither a subjective or cultural worldview but rather the universal human capacity to achieve a harmonious and meaningful perception of the world, grounded in aesthetic and teleological judgment.

Friedrich Nietzsche (1906), posthumous oil on canvas by Edvard Munch (1863-1944).  In the popular imagination, Nietzsche's Weltanschauung remains probably the best remembered German worldview of the nineteenth century.

It spread too to the English-speaking world and the influence on British & US writers of eighteenth & nineteenth century German philosophers was profound, tied to a shared concern with romanticism and idealism which was a challenge to the English tradition of empiricism.  In 1868, the US philosopher & psychologist William James (1842–1910) used weltanschauung in an essay titled The Sentiment of Rationality, published in The North American Review.  Very much in the tradition of Kant’s “worldview”, the essay explored the nature of belief, rationality and the human tendency to seek coherent perspectives on existence: intellectual commitments, emotional and practical needs.  What James wrote would have been familiar to those schooled in Kant but he expressed things in a more accessible way, explaining a worldview as the product of one’s quest for an intellectual unity which resolves apparent contradictions or ambiguities in one’s understanding of the world.  The essay in 1868 was an early work but James’ concept of Weltanschauung appears also in his major works including The Principles of Psychology (1890) and The Varieties of Religious Experience (1902); his interest in how individuals and societies construct meaning was life-long.  Probably, in English, the use of weltanschauung usually isn’t necessary because unlike other German borrowings like Zeitgeist (spirit of the age) or schadenfreude (taking pleasure form another's misfortune) which express in one word what in English takes a phrase, the literal translation “worldview” does the job.  However, it’s handy for those who wish to suggest and an outlook something in the vein of nineteenth century German philosophical thought, especially if accompanied by an apprehension of dread though definitely it doesn’t convey: “a certain Teutonic je ne sais quoi”.

Wednesday, May 17, 2023

Billigung

Billigung (pronounced bill-a-ghin)

(1) To approve.

(2) To acquiesce.

(3) Tacitly to accept; not to oppose.

(4) "Looking the other way" from something one would not wish to admit knowledge of; a means of creating a defense of plausible deniability; a self-denial of knowledge.

1300s: A Modern German form from the Old High German billīh (appropriate), from the Proto-Germanic biliz (merciful, kind, decent, fair), the variant being Billigung (approval; acceptance), the construct being billig(en) +‎ -ung (from the Middle High German -ung & -unge, from the Old High German -unga, from the Proto-Germanic -ungō; it was used to forms nouns from verbs, usually describing either an event in which an action is carried out, or the result of that action).  The third-person singular & simple present tense is billigt, the past tense is billigte, the past participle is gebilligt and the auxiliary haben.  In German, bein a noun there's always an initial capital but when used in English as a general descriptor (sepecially in a legal context), it usually all in lower-case.  Billigung is a noun and in German, there's no plural form although in English-language texts it might appear as "billigungs" for the sake of clarity. 

When wishing not to know, look the other way

The German Billigung is not so much hard to translate as able to be translated in a number of senses; context is everything.  The way it is used to mean “looking away; avoiding specific knowledge of something which one knows or suspects is happening” was clarified in 1977.  Albert Speer (1905-1981, Reich Minister for Armaments 1942-1945), the convicted war criminal, had always denied any knowledge of the holocaust and was displeased when sent the English translation of a profile to be published in Die Zeit magazine in which Billigung had been rendered as his “...tacit consent... of the final solution.  This he corrected, explaining Billigung in this context meant looking away.  This meant he averted his gaze from the worst crime of the criminal régime he served in order to be able to deny he knew of it.  Speer, predictably, was able to summon a word to explain this too: Ahnumg (the sensing of something without quite knowing exactly what).  He did at least concede the implication of his translation “...is as grave…” as the original, one biographer noting that had Speer said as much at his trial “…he would have been hanged.”  Other historians and some lawyers disagreed with that but it was an assertion the author was unable to pursue.  When she tried to nudge Speer a little further, pointing out that for one to look away from something, one must first know it's there, he didn’t deny what he’d earlier said but added they “…must never speak of it again".  The moment passed and within weeks he would be dead, dying "on the job" in police slang.  Some have noted the feeling Speer conveyed of always somehow longing to confess his knowledge of the holocaust.  He so often came so close to admitting he knew what he'd always denied, as if the last great act of his life would have been to admit worst of the the guilt he convinced himself (and some others) he'd evaded when the International Military Tribunal (IMT) at the first Nuremberg  Trial (1945-1946) convicted him of war crimes & crimes against humanity (counts 3 & 4) and sentenced him to twenty years imprisonment.

Albert Speer in conversation with his lawyer Dr Hans Flächsner (1896-dod unrecorded) and a legal associate, Nuremburg, 1945.

Looking the other way.

In what he described as a “...leadership failure...", former Australian cricket captain Steve Smith (b 1989) has admitted he "didn't want to know about it" when he became aware something was being planned after seeing team mates in a dressing room discussion.  Their talks he witnessed were about ball-tampering, a form of cheating which came to be known as sandpapergate.  Billigung is one of those useful German creations (zeitgeist, schadenfreude et al) which in one word conveys what might in English take a dozen or more.  Operating somewhere on the spectrum of plausible deniability, Billigung is where someone hears of or perhaps “senses” something of which they’d prefer there be no admissible evidence of their knowledge; they “look the other way”.

Gladys Berejiklian (b 1970; Premier (Liberal) of New South Wales 2017-2021) & Daryl Maguire (b 1959, MLA (Liberal) for Wagga Wagga 1999-2018).

For some, Billigung might have come to mind when pondering the recording of a telephone call between then New South Wales (Australia) Premier Gladys Berejiklian and Daryl Maguire, another member of the same parliament with whom she was in an intimate relationship, a man forced to resign as an MP as a result of an (ongoing)  investigation by the NSW Independent Commission against Corruption (ICAC) for allegedly using his political influence in business activities.  Of interest was the premier’s use of the phrase "I don't need to know about that bit" when the former member began to tell her some details of his dubious deals.  To that pertinent observation, Mr Maguire replied "No, you don't".  The suggestion is the premier failed to declare a conflict of interest when dealing with the allocation of taxpayer funds which would be to the benefit of her then lover.  The words used by the then premier: "I don't need to know about that bit" may be compared with how Speer described his response in mid-1944 to being warned by a friend "never, under any circumstances" "to accept an invitation to inspect a concentration camp in Upper Silesia".  Speer's friend explained that at that place he'd "...seen something there which he was not permitted to describe and moreover could not describe".  Having received what he claimed was his first knowledge of Auschwitz, Speer asked no questions of anyone, later admitting: "I did not want to know what was happening there".  That was what he later called Billigung.     

At the time the recording was made public, the former premier denied any wrongdoing beyond having appalling taste in men.  Apart from the men in her life (and not a few women would ruefully admit to having "had a Daryl"), she probably was unlucky.  Billigung has long been a part of that essential tactic of political survival: "plausible deniability".  Actually, as practiced these days, because standards of accountability seem to have declined a bit, denials needs no longer be plausible, just not actually disproven by a publicly available audio tape or film clip.  Others, beyond NSW, might be taking interest, especially those south of the border intimately involved in party machines who, apparently for decades, didn't notice certain things going on around them.     

On 1 October 2021, the NSW ICAC announced certain investigations into the former premier's conduct in office.  Specifically, ICAC is focusing on the period between 2012-2018 and her her involvement in the circumstances in which public money was given to a shooting club and a conservatorium of music and whether that conduct was “...liable to allow or encourage the occurrence of corrupt conduct by Mr Maguire.  The ICAC will explore whether the conduct constituted a breach of public trust by placing the former premier in a position where a conflict of interest existed between her public duties and private interests “...as a person who was in a personal relationship with Mr Maguire.  The commission will also investigate whether she failed to report what could be defined as reasonable suspicions that “...concerned or may concern corrupt conduct in relation to the conduct of Mr Maguire.  As a point of law, the ICAC is concerned with actual substantive conduct and conflicts of interest.  It is not the test of "apprehended bias" applied to the judiciary where judgements can be set aside if a court finds there could have been a "reasonable perception" of bias or conflict of interest in some way involving a judge.  To the ICAC, any degree of perception, reasonable or not, is not relevant, their findings must be based on actual conduct.

On 1 October 2021, Berejiklian announced her resignation from both the premiership and the legislative assembly.  There are critics of the NSW ICAC who oppose the public hearings and feel its rules permit an exercise of powers rather too much like the Court of Star Chamber which they say it too closely resembles.  However, the former premier can reflect that unlike the IMT at Nuremberg, neither the Star Chamber nor the ICAC were vested with capital jurisdiction so there’s that.

Dieselgate and implausible deniability

Former Audi CEO Rupert Stadler (b 1963, right) with his lawyers Ulrike Thole-Groll (left) & Thilo Pfordte (centre) during his trial, Munich District Court, May 2023.

The billigung defense is still heard in German courts and if not always exculpatory, lawyers still appreciate its effectiveness in mitigation.  Rupert Stadler began his career with Audi AG (a subsidiary of the Volkswagen Group) in 1990 and between 2010-2018 was Audi’s Chief Executive Officer (CEO).  The scandal which came to be known as “dieselgate” involved companies in the Volkswagen group (and others) installing “cheat” software in diesel-powered vehicles so excessive exhaust emissions wouldn’t be detected during official testing and, after years of obfuscation, Volkswagen in 2015 admitted that was what exactly they’d done.  Civil and criminal proceedings in a number of jurisdictions ensued and thus far the fines alone have cost the group well over 34 million.  There have also been jail sentences imposed, something which presumably would have been in Herr Stadler’s thoughts when, in March 2018, Munich prosecutors named him as a suspect in their investigations.  A week later, he was arrested and held in an Augsburg prison, apparently as a precautionary move because it was claimed he was tampering with evidence by making a telephone call in which he suggested putting a witness “on leave”.  After a month, he was released on bail, subject to certain conditions.

In September 2020, Herr Stadler’s trial on charges of fraud began and for years (proceedings now take rather longer than in 1945-1946) he denied all wrongdoing until, in May 2023, he accepted a plea deal offered by Judge Stefan Weickert which would require him to admit guilt.  To date, he’s the highest-ranking executive to confess, tempted apparently by (1) the preponderance of evidence before the court which made it clear he was guilty as sin and (2) the deal limiting his punishment to a 1.1 million fine and a suspended sentence which would not see him jailed, an attractive alternative to the long term of imprisonment he otherwise faced upon conviction.  As confessions go however, it was among the more nuanced.  His lawyer read a statement saying the defendant (1) did not know that vehicles had been manipulated and buyers had been harmed, but (2) he acknowledged it was a possibility and accepted that, adding that in his case (3) there was a need for more care.  A classic piece of billigung, was the line (4) “I didn't know, but I recognized it as possible and accepted that the properties of diesel engines might not meet legal approval requirements” while the statement (5) “I have to admit the allegations overall” had an echo of Speer’s admission of “a general responsibility” while denying personal guilt.  Still, it must have conformed with the terms of the plea bargain because it was accepted by the judge.  His lawyer read the statement, apparently because he couldn’t bring himself personally to utter it but when asked by the judge if the words were his own, Herr Stadler replied (5) “Ja”.

Lindsay Lohan with Audi A5 cabriolet, Los Angeles, May 2011.  Ms Lohan apparently avoided being affected by the dieselgate scandal, all the photographs of her driving Audis have featured gasoline (petrol) powered cars.

Outside the court, his lawyer was a little more expansive, admitting her client had allowed vehicles equipped with manipulating software to remain on sale even after learning of the scam.  In the course of addressing the diesel issue" after the revelations became public, Stadler “neglected” to inform business partners that cars with so-called defeat devices were still going on the market, meaning he was “accepting that vehicles equipped with the illegal software would go on sale” she said.  Although it may have been stating the obvious, she added Herr Stadler regretted he’d been unable to “resolve the crisis”.  The carefully composed text may however have averted another crisis, lawyers noting the cryptic nature of some of his comments might be explained by a desire not to create grounds for additional claims by consumers for financial compensation.

How that might unfold remains to be seen but on 27 June 2023 the Munich court handed down a 21 month sentence, suspended for three years, a fine of €1.1 million (US$1.2 million) also imposed; that will go to the federal government and charities, the court ruled without providing details.  Herr Stadler was the first member of the Volkswagen board member to be sentenced for his part in the scandal, the judgment coming some four years after prosecutors first laid fraud charges.  Guilty verdicts were also delivered against two former Audi executives: head of engine development Wolfgang Hatz (b 1959) and lead diesel engineer Giovanni Pamio (b 1963) who were handed suspended jail sentences of 24 months and 21 months, respectively.  Hatz was fined €400,000 (US$437,000) and Pamio €50,000 (US$55,000).  All three were guilty as sin so the verdicts were unsurprising.

Dr Angela Merkel (b 1954; chancellor of Germany 2005-2021) & Dr Martin Winterkorn (b 1947; CEO of Volkswagen AG 2007-2015).

The long-running scandal (the fines and settlements thus far ordered having cost the group some €33 billion (US$36 billion)) still has some way to run because the case against former CEO Martin Winterkorn has yet to be heard although he’s already agreed to pay VW €11.2 million (US$12.3 million) after an internal investigation found he failed properly to respond to signs the company may have been using unlawful technology which enabled its diesel engines to evade emissions testing and it's not yet clear if Dr Winterkorn will try the billigung defense.  Herr Stadler was required to pay VW €4.1 million ($US4.5 million) under terms agreed following the same investigation.  The company clearly wished to move on and in separately issued statements, Volkswagen and Audi said they were not party to Tuesday’s proceedings, which should be “viewed independently” of proceedings against the companies which had (in Germany) been finalized in 2018.  Audi seemed anxious to confirm it was now a righteous corporation, saying “Audi has made good use of the crisis as an opportunity to start over.  We have updated our systems, processes and checks to ensure compliance company-wide.  It concluded by noting it had since “cultivated and strengthened a culture of constructive debate.”  In exchange for agreeing to pay the fines, prosecutors dropped criminal charges against Volkswagen and Audi.