- Oct 2017
To testify to a history of oppression is necessary, but it is not sufficient unless that history is redirected into intellectual process and universalized to include all sufferers. Yet too often testimony to oppression becomes only a justification for further cruelty and inhumanity,
Here, Said is telling us that in order for history of oppression to have a purpose, it needs to be used in such a way where all of the voices of all of the oppressed can be heard or else we only hear the voices that justify tyranny. I think this is true and still remains true today, because if we only get that one part of history that has some justification, nothing changes. This is why history repeats itself; we don't look at exactly all of the suffering that happens.
- Jul 2017
The justification of inequality
The act of condition the citizenship to accept and expect stratification based on merit in society, thereby justifying unequal rewards (low pay, no health benefits, no control over shifts, low social status etc.)
- Dec 2015
Agreementis the good stuff in science; it’s the high fives.But it is easy to think we’re in agreement, when really we’re not. Modeling ourthoughts on heuristics and pictures may be convenient for quick travel down the road,but we’re liable to miss our turnoff at the first mile. The danger is in mistaking ourconvenient conceptualizations for what’s actually there. It is imperative that we havethe ability at any time to ground out in reality.
- Feb 2014
As intellectual property lacks scarcity, and the protection of it fails the Lockean Proviso, there is no natural right to intellectual property. As such, the justification for intellectual property rights arises from the social con tract, and in the case of the United States, the Constitution.
The justification for intellectual property from the social contract established by the US Constitution; it otherwise has no justification by natural right because it fails the Lockean Proviso.
Fisher points out that the rights - based, non - utilitarian theory is greatly influenced by two concepts: (1) the western ideology of property from Locke (that people are entitled to own the fruits of their labors, and should be rewarded in proportion to their contributions); and (2) the “romantic conception of authorship” of the divinely inspired individual genius or artist (1999, Sect. II. B).
The first is the soul of the rights-based theory
The critical difference comes out in the details, especially the amount of time rights are protected and the scope of rights allowed
This paper establishes cause to suspect that current intellectual property policy overstep s utilitarian justification, and suggests that a clearer distinction should be drawn between the proper role of U.S. law in intellectual property (that which promotes innovation) and moral questions of creator’s rights.
- social contract
- romantic conception of authorship
- cause to suspect
- US Constitution
- non-utilitarian justification
- Lockean Proviso
- intellectual property
- natural right
- utilitarian justification