9 Matching Annotations
  1. May 2022
    1. I think it may have been the British Library interview in which Wengrow says something like, you know, no one ever challenges a new conservative book and says, so and so has just offered a neoliberal perspective on X. But when an anarchist says something, people are sure to spend most of their time remarking on his politics. I think it's relevant that G&W call out Pinker's cherry-picking of Ötzi the ice man. They counter this with the Romito 2 specimen, but they insist that it is no more conclusive than Ötzi. So how does a challenging new interpretation gain ground in the face of an entrenched dominant narrative?

      This sentiment is very similar to one in a recent lecture series I'd started listening to: The Modern Intellectual Tradition: From Descartes to Derrida #.

      Lawrence Cahoone specifically pointed out that he would be highlighting the revolutionary (and also consequently the most famous) writers because they were the ones over history that created the most change in their field of thought.

      How does the novel and the different manage to break through?

      How does this relate to the broad thesis of Thomas S. Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions?

      The comment Wengrow makes about "remarking on [an anarchist's] politics" as a means of attacking their ideas is quite similar to the sort of attacks that are commonly made on women. When female politicians make relevant remarks and points, mainstream culture goes to standbys about their voice or appearance: "She's 'shrill'", or "She doesn't look very good in that dress." They attack anything but the idea itself.

  2. Jan 2021
  3. Sep 2020
  4. Jul 2020
  5. May 2020
  6. Sep 2015
    1. The groups that practiced kindness and engaged in novel acts both experienced a significant—and roughly equal—boost in happiness; the third group didn’t get any happier. The findings suggest that good deeds do in fact make people feel good—even when performed over as little as 10 days—and there may be particular benefits to varying our acts of kindness, as novelty seems linked to happiness as well. But kindness may have a longer, even more profound effect on our happiness
  7. Feb 2014
    1. A universal definition of intellectual property might begin by identifying it as nonphysical property which stems from, is identified as, and whose value is based upon some idea or ideas. Furthermore, there must be some additional element of novelty. Indeed, the object, or res, of intellectual property may be so new that it is unknown to anyone else. The novelty, however, does not have to be absolute. What is important is that at the time of propertization the idea is thought to be generally unknown. The re

      Intellectual property cannot be common currency in the intellectual life of the society at the time of propertization.

      What constitutes society at this point; do small groups and communities suffice or does it have to be popularly known beyond a small few?

    1. O r i g i n a l i t y d o e s n o t s i g n i f y n o v e l t y ; a w o r k m a y b e o r i g i n a l e v e n t h o u g h i t c l o s e l y r e s e m b l e s o t h e r w o r k s s o l o n g a s t h e s i m i l a r i t y i s f o r t u i t o u s , n o t t h e r e s u l t o f c o p y i n g . T o i l l u s t r a t e , a s s u m e t h a t t w o p o e t s , e a c h i g n o r a n t o f t h e o t h e r , c o m p o s e i d e n t i c a l p o e m s . N e i t h e r w o r k i s n o v e l , y e t b o t h a r e o r i g i n a l a n d , h e n c e , c o p y r i g h t a b l e .

      See Sheldon v. Metro-Goldwyn Pictures Corp., 81 F. 2d 49, 54 (CA2 1936)