Final Article summary: THE MYTH OF THE SOLE INVENTOR, The theory of patent law is based on the idea that a lone genius can solve problems that stump the experts, and that the lone genius will do so only if properly given incentives. The result is a real problem for classic theories of patent law. Maybe the problem is not with our current patent law, but with our current patent theory. But the dominant alternative theories of patent law don't do much better. If patent law in its current form can be saved, we need an alternative justification for granting patents even in circumstances of near-simultaneous invention.
The Rhetoric of Albert Einstein The effectiveness of Albert Einstein’s rhetoric can be broken down into different parts. His connection of subject, speaker, and audience, his context and descriptions that explain his answer’s purpose, and his appeal to Ethos (Trust), Logos (Reason), and Pathos (Emotion). Through these building blocks of rhetoric, one can connect to the audience and successfully persuade them to believe and understand you. Unfortunately, Albert Einstein does not succeed in correctly building any of his rhetoric. He maintains a disconnection with the audience because of his diction and methodology of explanation, which is highly scientific.
The idea of power has many aspects to it and therefore is difficult to define. Some consider power to be authority while others may consider it to be control, yet no matter how many definitions society may come up with there is one undeniable fact. Power is intoxicating. The idea of being superior in anyway shape or form is seducing and almost impossible to turn down. Two admired philosophers, Michel Foucault and John Berger, have blessed the world with their different yet similar views on power and how it is obtained.
I think it possible that we might one day be able to harness outside stimuli in such a way that creativity - surely the ultimate expression of individuality - is actually boosted rather than diminished. I am optimistic and excited by what future research will reveal into the workings of the human brain, and the extraordinary process by which it is translated into a uniquely individual mind. But I'm also concerned that we seem to be so oblivious to the dangers that are already upon us. Well, that debate must start now. Identity, the very essence of what it is to be human, is
In ‘If Free Will Doesn’t Exist, Neither Does Water’, Vargas asserts that most people nowadays connect science and free will and use it to prove that free will does not actually exist. I personally believe that these claims are too hasty as the issue requires substantive commitments about disputed philosophical ideas. Aside from that, he also mentions that science has a different way to explain the detail of history of the things that we know without abandoning anything else. In section 1, I will explain the connection between science and our actions. In section 2, I will discuss why if our actions are casually determined, then we don’t have free will.
However, both characters’ temperament is rather similar in some ways both being somewhat craven without being hardly virile. Both stories have their pros and cons like everything else, yet they both center around the effect technology can have on the real, outside world. I personally felt that Bradbury’s story was more interesting than Skurzynski’s story. I found his concept that the slightest thing in the past might tremendously change the future causing a chain-reaction that, in the book, can be a ghastly one to be an intriguing idea. This story left me interested in Bradbury’s concept and wishing that the story had gone on longer.
This loss of values has added to the deterioration of modern society. Huxley correctly predicted that this triviality would be the downfall. Although Brave New World may seem preposterous to us, it is quite the mirror image of today's society. Keeping in mind the progress that science has made from the Scientific Revolution, it would not be an outrageous assumption to say that by connecting personal interests of scientists and society in general, there is the possibility of achieving a world close to, if not identical to World State. Works Cited Huxley, Aldous.
The power of knowledge is another major theme in The White Castle. The Narrator and Hoja are both seen as intellectuals. However, while neither can truly claim that they know more than the other at first, the narrator's knowledge is contemporary, and more scientifically sound than Hoja's, which is filtered through another language, and then filtered again through dogma. The models of the heliocentric and geocentric universes also come to represent the two men and their views on the world. The narrator sees and uses his knowledge as a way to help whereas Hoja uses his knowledge to move his own ambitions forward.
A scientific determinist will say that any choice we make is merely an illusion of free will. We see the choices we make as free will because of the inherent complexities involved with the mind. Although we do not fully grasp the complexities of the human brain, scientific determinism states that, knowing everything there is to know about the rules of the universe we would be able to determine what a person was going to do. On the other hand, free-willists believe that humans do in fact have free will. There is some amount of causal powers attributed to the brain that cannot be simply by analyzing the electromagnetic-fields and quarks in the brain.
What for, can we use hypnosis? Hypnosis is very useful because it can help us program the mind, put new beliefs in it or to strengthen the old ones. Since the subconscious controls our behaviour, we can install completely new behaviour patterns. Imagine the things we could do having the ability to modify the old unwanted beliefs and thoughts. What our life would be like, if we were able to remove the negative beliefs about our self, our self-image, about our inferiority feelings or about being unable to succeed?