This was a very ambitious project by Harris who is attempting to bridge the previously thought incompatible domain of science and values. Harris attempts to do this by arguing that the goal of any ineligible value system must be the promotion of the well-being of conscious beings.
Surely we can distinguish objectively between the abyss of the state of worst of human misery and the peaks of human flourishing on the moral landscape? Yes, but this argument is a straw man because the path between the two remains completely hidden because Harris restricts his argument’s to the vaguest and extreme notions of well-being and misery.
Harris never shows how I can objectively critique another’s values apart from showing internal inconsistency. Yes, a person can be radically mistaken about what actions will lead to their own well-being as in the case of all sorts of supernatural beliefs and superstitions. But if the neuroscience shows that a woman wearing a Burka or submitting to the will of her husband is genuinely satisfied by these actions then there is no further way to navigate or even map out the moral landscape.
Hume’s decree ‘no ought from an is’ mistaken to the extent that facts about the effect of our values and decisions arising from those values on ourselves and others can suggest what we ‘ought’ to do. However, if I am correct that I would derive no satisfaction from caring whether my neighbour starves to death or not then science is unable to criticise my position.
Harris’ answer is that the position of the psychopath should simply be excluded from discussions of moral discourse but again this is where Harris only deals with moral extremes. There is of course a wide spectrum ranging from total compassion to a total lack of empathy and Harris does not advance the argument very far that rationality can only require moral agents be consistent be it in their depravity of their goodness.
Much of the book is spent discussing adjuncts to the main argument; the problem of religion, the problem of free-will etc. I was satisfied that he proved the very weak claim that well-being can be objectively measured and moral systems tend to be about promoting well-being. If Harris wants to advocate a complete theory of n
Frankl aptly describes his philosophy as one of “tragic optimism”. That is, not optimism leading to tragedy but optimism in spite of and in many ways precisely because of tragedy. For an Auschwitz survivor to nurture an optimistic view of the nature of human suffering is nothing short of remarkable and endows this captivating book with a serious credibiility and authenticity.
Frankl develops the existentialism of Nietzshe and Schopenhauer and strips them of their pessimism and depends on an ‘acive nihilism’ that firmly places the responsinility on oneself to create the meaning and values of one’s own life. Contrary to Freud’s ‘will to pleasure’ and Nietzshe’s ‘will to power’, Frankl finds himself and his other holocaust prisoner’s capacity for power and pleausure destroyed. Frankl instead argues that the ‘will to meaning’ is the greatest driving force of man and capable of keeping him alive in the face of upmost suffering.
It is only through suffering and the challenges of life that our actions can have meaning, to reach a “tensionless state or homeo-stasis” is to give up on life; this he calls an “existential vacuum” that is a frequent symptom of the life of modern day man.
Within this book I found this both an extremely modern philosophy and an extremely moving story.
Philosophy attempts to bring under critical review and to correct errors in the cultural mind of our civilization, the prevailing assumptions and beliefs about our knowledge-yielding powers, the various sectors of the culture, and the basic structure of the world. It holds the cultural mind accountable to the unavoidable presuppositions of experience, thought and action. Errors in the cultural mind can lead to distortions in the development of the culture and to social and personal pathologies (…). The mission of philosophy today is to point out the errors in our cultural mind and to work for a humanistic cultural reform.
E, Maynard Adams, “The Mission of Philosophy Today,” Metaphilosophy 31 (2000), 349.
Are you a musician, DJ, music producer that enjoys taking sound samples and loops of other musician’s pieces of music, loading them into your favourite music production software and remixing them into your own track. Remix Comps lists remix contests found on the internet so that audio DJs and musicians can quickly and easily find a great piece of music to remix.
Remix contests provide a new way in which fans (who are musically inclined themselves) can interact with the music that they like. Making music for many is a fun past-time and there is a whole bunch of musicians out there waiting to remix your music, but why would they want to remix your music? Well here are a few reasons…
Because they find it fun to remix other peoples’ music.
It is a great way for them to learn and practice making music.
To increase their own portfolio of music productions that they have made.
To get their own music noticed by people who like their remix.
To win the contest prize (which if it is something like a release on a label then it is also a way to get their own music promoted.
As you can see there is numerous reasons why someone would want to remix your music, but what benefits do you get as the remix contest organizer and how far does it go to promoting your music… well yet again here are a few of the benefits…
Your contest and therefore your music may get promoted around the net at various sites, forums and blogs by musicians who like your contest.
When a musician gets interested in your contest, the first thing they’re likely to do is find the original version and listen to it, giving your music listeners.
You get a collection of remixes in different genres which you can release or use on your site, MySpace for other fans to enjoy. You could even release some as a remix album.
By allowing remixers to post their remixes on their own web sites and MySpace profiles, you may find that fans of the remixers who enjoyed listening to those remixes will decide to check out the original version and your other tracks.
As you can see there are some great benefits to running a remix contest for both you and your remixers. I’m sure you would also agree that it is a form of promotion that could last some time because the last example above of allowing remixers to post their remixes on MySpace etc could mean that the remix contest is still working to promote your music 6 months or even 1 year from now.
It is also a comparatively cheap way of promoting your music too as the only costs involved are a bit of your time to set up the contest and the obvious cost of the final prize. The reason why it could be very cheap promotion is because you get all of the above promotion benefits for what you you might have needed to have paid for a one-time fee freelance remix and yet you might get 3, 4 or even 10 really decent remixes for a similar cost.
It might even cost you next to nothing for the prize as if your label or if you release your own music you can release a few extra remixes on a single or album release as the prize. This sort of prize is not only a fun prize for the remix contest entrants but it is also not that costly and could even make you/your label money from remix sales.
Remember we can help by providing free of charge the tools to create your contest on this site thanks to our Remix Contest Creator which comes with a great looking widget you can place on your own web site or MySpace page. This makes running your own contest not only easier to set up and get going but also possibly cheaper as you don’t need to hire a web designer to program the tools for you, it’s all there ready for you to use.
The level of technology that is within the grasp of a single person or even a collection of unknowing collaborators allows creativity to flower and prosper over the internet.
Whether it’s Reggie Watts creating an ensemble with his mouth:
Or Kutiman of Thru-You.com mixing together people who have never met. (Source: MakeTunes)
Or take someone like Lasse Gjertsen who blurs the lines between ‘musician’ and ‘editor’:
On each of these websites, you can click a button to support the cause -- each click creates funding, and costs you nothing! Bookmark these sites, and click once a day!
Recent Comments