Science can answer moral questions. ...Or can it?

PG Music Home

I thought this was an interesting dialog. The TED talks are usually enlightening.

It's 23 mins, so you you are forewarned. LOL. But it is worth watching.

The link is:

http://wimp.com/moralquestions/

If you take time to watch it, please let me know your thoughts.

This isn't political, ideaological or religious, by the way, in any way shape or form.

I just found it very interesting. And for a musical note, "shave and a haircut,..........two bits".

Bob

And for those who may be interested, the home page for TED is:

http://www.ted.com/

Good stuff. Well worth taking time to watch.

Bob

Sorry, Off topic is supposed to be related to music or PG products and our use or thoughts.

I have a wide range of opinions on a whack of things, but have recently made a decision to stay on topic here, as much as possible, unless you start to attack my (and I used this word recently which got me a lot of PM's), ethnocentric POV.

Off Topic is indeed supposed to be about music related items.

However, I have seen a lot of discussions here on marginally or non-music related subjects.

Perhaps an area for non-music discussions is warranted. There are a lot of pretty smart folks on this forum from many countries and backgrounds, so I always learn something when reading the various views and opinions expressed here.

"Yeah"

Quote:

Robert Gupta, violinist with the LA Philharmonic, talks about a violin lesson he once gave to a brilliant, schizophrenic musician -- and what he learned. Called back onstage later, Gupta plays his own transcription of the prelude from Bach's Cello Suite No. 1.

Here is a discussion on music that is realy at the heart of who we are here whether we are proficient at this craft or simple love the emotions of music.
This is off the link:
http://www.ted.com/

Quote:

#270070 - Tue Mar 30 2010 03:59 AM
Sorry, Off topic is supposed to be related to music or PG products and our use or thoughts.

John,

It’s interesting that you posted that on my thread just 9 minutes after starting a non-musical thread of your own:

Quote:

Close all forums?
#270069 - Tue Mar 30 2010 03:50 AM
Reply
Quote
Quick Reply

Let's have at it, pros and cons.

This is not controversy for it's own sake, it's thinking outside the box.
Move the forums to Facebook.

Cons:
1. Leave things alone, change is bad.
2. We are comfortable here, stay in our neighbourhood. (Why does it insist I spell that word wrong?)
3. Hmm.

Pros:
1. You can easily post videos, photos and everyone hangs out there = sales.
2. More sales equals more development.
3. This type of forum is outdated, and makes communication harder.

I don't know, it was a hmm moment, maybe I'm way off base, maybe not. There is a facebook group, just it's quiet...they don't even post stuff like the last build there.

Have at it guys and gals.....

Maybe we should all try and do both...???

BTW, due to Canadian laws on privacy Facebook had to make a bunch of changes and allow you options.

--------------------
John Conley
The Best Backing Tracks at PGmusic!
www.plumbingfactorybrassband.com

That’s pretty hypocritical of you, don’t you think? Or is it a “do as I say, not as I do” type of thing?

The link I posted wasn’t contentious, just interesting. Since most of the PG’ers are a pretty open minded bunch, I thought they would enjoy it.

Bob

Wyndham,

Thanks for the heads up on that on. I hadn't watched it before.

Robert Gupta: Music is medicine, music is sanity

http://www.ted.com/talks/robert_gupta.html

Bob

So, can music save your mortal soul?

The post about the forums is related to the mass marketing of a piece of music software. You are nit picking.

rubberball103,

Quote:

So, can music save your mortal soul?

Nope.

Bob

No Conley, you were "nit picking" when you chose to comment on this thread. I was simply pointing out your hypocrisy.

Bob

Maybe a sub-forum called 'Way, way Off Topic!' Non-music related rants and opinions...

Actually, I really enjoy the vast diversity of opinions expressed here, especially from the non-USA folks. We Yanks get too insular about ourselves too often, in my opinion, and I like to hear from some different perspectives. Note that we Texans don't cotten to being called 'Yanks' very much, but we are a laid-back bunch for the most part and take that moniker in stride...mostly.

Quote:

rubberball103,

Quote:

So, can music save your mortal soul?

Nope.

Bob

Don McClean said so!

Picnicing is better than nitpicking.

If one needs to "get into it" with political/religious/moral/etc topics, I would suggest this:

http://acapella.harmony-central.com/forumdisplay.php?f=52

They sure know how to get into it.

Glenn

Glenn: I've been a registered Harmony Central forum member for quite some time now. Yes, they do 'get into it', but not in a very logical and rational way sometimes, and there is a lot of swearing and flaming, etc.

At least here we can discuss some things from our own viewpoints with a bit of self restraint and courtesy. I find the folks here to be a very talented and pretty well-informed group, so i almost always learn something new from these 'off topic' discussions, and that's why I read them. None of my opinions are carved into stone, so I can change them and have changed some of them. I especially like to hear from folks outside of North America to get a more global perspective.

In any event, I'd like to have a place here where some non-music related topics can be discussed civilly and rationally. I don't see this getting out of hand or becoming a flame war, and it would be very informative and educational in my opinion.

Something that puzzled me about this thread is there's nothing contentious about the original link.

There's no side to take. It's simply thought provoking. I just wonder how many people actually watched the link.

Maybe I shouldn't have said it was 23 mins long! LOL.

Bob

Bob I watched several minutes of the video and formed an opinion that was neither in favor or against his opening statements.
My thought was that again we have differences on language and the assumptions that are drawn as the basis for the discussion. There again this is neither pro or con, but the use of a subset of a language(science) to frame a context that for the speaker is valid but not to everyone in the extended group.
I wish to point out that even if every thing that he said was a valid argument the other video that I referred to about music and the communication with someone that the baseline of society disallows as a member shows that for mentally disabled, his language context can not be reconciled with the moral/science debate. My conclusion is that as most things like that it sounds interesting but is revelation's to a select group is like a tree falling in the forest, only if the tree hits me in the head does it matter.
Wyndham

Hey rubberball, we would have to ask Buddy Holly that question since he was the one Don had in mind when he wrote the day the music died.

BTW, did anyone ever see Nacho Libre when Jack Black's tag team partner would say when asked abuot his beliefs is "I believe in science." Then, Nacho fills a little basin and dunks his team mates head in it to baptize him. Too funny! You had to see it.

Just to throw some fuel on this topic,
at one end you have guys like this -

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/mar/29/james-lovelock-climate-change

Yeah, I know, look at the source... but then look at the actual source (the guy it is about).
This does nothing to help science. Quite the contrary. The article defeats its purpose.
This is not an April Fools joke, look at the date.

For sure. Actually Don McClean asked the question. Didn't exactly say it did.

Quote:

Just to throw some fuel on this topic,
at one end you have guys like this -

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/mar/29/james-lovelock-climate-change

Yeah, I know, look at the source... but then look at the actual source (the guy it is about).
This does nothing to help science. Quite the contrary. The article defeats its purpose.
This is not an April Fools joke, look at the date.

Bob:

I read the whole article, and the complete one that links to it.

Personally I think he's one of the few that actually has the balls to tell it like it is. To quote a few comments:

"Humans are too stupid to prevent climate change from radically impacting our lives over the coming decades".

"One of the main obstructions is modern democracy".

"Even the best democracies agree that when a major war approaches, democracy must be put on hold for the time being".

His comments will rile feathers, no doubt, but I'd have to agree that he's right.

We humans are so self-aggrandizing that we cant see what we're doing to the Earth.

Glenn

To answer the OP....no, it can not...and yes I watched the clip....

Yes it can and is starting to do so right now....

The Moral Brain

I watched the whole vid too!

Glen,

No argument that we are not making the earth any better. However, one of the main complaints on the other side is that the AGW movement is a grab for control, and outright saying what he said plays directly into their hand.

I personally think the incentive to cleaner energy has a great monetary reward, and in our history that has always been enough to get some great inventions. Giving up freedom for reassurance from the gubmint just doesn't sit well with a lot of folks..

Then there is the little problem of the non-democratic countires and their surging growth. So if we tax and restrict oil, etc, here - it will just make it cheaper for them. Their concern for the environment has not shown itself to be reliable, so I really question whether it would make an iota of difference, other than our surrendering the problems and associated freedoms.

Oh, and I found it a little condescending and insulting personally.

rharv,

Quote:

Oh, and I found it a little condescending and insulting personally.

I read variations of the article on a couple of sources and I couldn't agree with you more.

It amazes me that so many refuse to acknowledge that the earth has always undergone "climate change". It always will.

Does this mean we shouldn't be good stewards of the earth? No. Does this mean we should devastate our economies to try control something that's beyond our control?

No.

Bob

Quote:

Oh, and I found it a little condescending and insulting personally.

I read variations of the article on a couple of sources and I couldn't agree with you more.

Does this mean we shouldn't be good stewards of the earth? No. Does this mean we should devastate our economies to try control something that's beyond our control?

No.

I would re-word the last statement thus: "Should we devastate the environment (and our economy) trying to do something that's beyond our control?"

Oops, we just did.

I've been following the Deepwater Horizon "issue", and it's extremely bothersome. And for some reason, I thought of this thread and the following:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/mar/29/james-lovelock-climate-change

I'm wondering if James Lovelock was all that wrong. Which reminds me of something George Carlin said:

"think how stupid the average person is, and realize that half of them are stupider".

Sadly this may provide an insight into how this disaster came about.

If during the course of applying science and technology, we can't prevent disasters, how can science/technology answer the original question?

I have a friend (a banker) that thinks that technology will come up with an alternative to fossil fuels (oil) for powering our vehicles (airplanes, cars, trucks, busses). I suggested that his faith in technology is misplaced. The only country that has ships that aren't powered by oil is the USA. One of them was here in our harbour the past few days - quite a sight - USS Ronald Reagan - an aircraft carrier.

Glenn