Second topic: File-sharing:
Gut Jung, "ponder and think a while"-I'd say, ideas improve with time, like a fine wine. Yes, studies, studies...I sometimes wonder if they are really a blessing or rather a curse. Relentlessly the question follows: can true education, the education for self-improvement, be acquired in these distinguished and, yes, formidable institutions who, with their weight of oak doors and power of the dean-king (Anspielung auf Plato's Philosopherking), impose knowledge rather than encourage the realization of knowledge? I do not know. What I do know is that I'm not too interested in Babylonian mythology when I have not yet fully discovered the depths of Sartre's mind or have not yet understood Aristotelian ethics. But I'm drifting beside the point. Your response is most enlightening; I've enjoyed reading it again and again very much. If you would, please allow me to expound upon my original argument. I agree with you that a language, indeed, must grow; after all, we exist in a dynamic society. The second point I subscribe to is the notion that languages die. That is the cold-hearted truth, isn't it? "language[s] cross borders" is, of course true, but please let me point to a further fact: the exchange of ideas, believes, and innermost convictions has exponentially accelerated over the past, say, 300 years; especially in the last TEN years the world has been exposed to great many more ideas then, say, in the time between 1800 and 1900 combined. We could speak of an affluence, yes, even an abundance of ideas-the proverbial tilt. In fact, we are confronted with so many ideas, constituted in words, that if we stack them they would reach up to the ozone hole. We do not have the time-nor the patience-to comprehend all of them; yet we try, superficially. And, this, my friend, alienates us from our own language. You are absolutely right when you insist that languages have always changed, languages have always died, and languages have always emerged. But at what speed did this development happen? How many decades or even centuries did it take until German could emerge? How many centuries did it need until Latin (or Hellenistic Greek) was no longer the language of a culture? Today all this is happening at the speed of a mouse click. I agree, "the world is growing together;" after all, we are only one species, but we should not forget that all development takes time and it cannot be forced. You are also, and especially there, right that English has great potential to be a unifying language for the world. English consists of a vast vocabulary, concise definitions, and is spoken by many people. But, I'm not sure if that is all that counts when humanity thinks of a language that should unite them. Cicero once confessed that Hellenistic Greek (compare, i.e., German) with its compound subjects is superior to Latin (compare, i.e., English), which operates with tight definitions and endless connotations. However, I am, by no means, advocating German over English, but I merely stress other credentials that a world language should meet. Okay mate, I'm not going to conclude this rubbish because I'm not sure what I'm saying anyway. I only wanted to spout out some more ideas on the topic. Let me speculate on our second topic: File sharing a blessing or a curse? I'm well aware that the traditional argument derives examples from a generalization made earlier in the text, but for this purpose I'll try to place the example before my general remarks-just so I can develop some more ideas as I write this. I will use the example of music. The first word that shoots to my mind when I think of file sharing is "Napster." Although, this shining star of anarchism will soon be reintegrated into the insidious network of capitalism it has gave the world some lessons. The first is that Napster demonstrated to the world how desperate the so-called artists, who claim to concentrate their soul into their music and live life for music etc., are really interested in making money. Music merely is the means to this sacred goal. The second is the question: who own ideas? Can copyright laws cope with a global society that has no boundaries? Are copyright laws necessary-or even legitimate-in the first place? File sharing enables people to instantly exchange ideas: computer programs, music, and other files (text, etc.). File sharing, as I understand it, has replaced yesterday's system of intellectual commerce. The only commodities we have left to sell are physical products: machinery, clothing, food, etc. Intellectual commodities are freely distributed. I think this is great! Ideas are after all common property. When I think about it, I must say that it is really absurd to copyright a book, or music in the first place because we do not discover a story or a song but we realize it. A book we have written, a song we have composed, is the product of the environment (natural, cultural, and material) we exist in. Who gives us the right to copyright something we have received from our environment? The "considerable threat to the market" can be challenged. Let's return to music: When file sharing diminishes all profits that can be made by selling music it will consequently remove large amounts of assets that would be used in music production. Removing money from music production will not doom music production and end musical expression, but reduce the amount of music published. People should understand less music as a benefit for humanity. Music will again be produced for self-expression and not for sale. Music, again, will be endowed with soul. The same applies to computer-programs, essays, poems, books, etc. Also consider this: When you can choose from all available solutions to a problem (computer programs) you will choose the most efficient not the best marketed. Yes, indeed, file sharing is very positive! I will conclude to two main condensed points: (1) free-file-sharing (which cannot be controlled) will change the way we view (eliminate) intellectual property and (2), by the same token, file sharing will bring back enthusiasm and soul to human intellectual work. I hope these humble lines could justify the topic you had in mind when you posed your question. Florian, in case I'm completely beside the point zapp me a note and I'll give you a new account. I also beg for mercy: I've only had a few minutes today to write you; you've probably noticed it in my writing. I'll give more thought to my arguments and place them on more solid foundation in the future, but for today please accept this rambling. I have this complex that subjects I speak about do not interest anyone else, therefore I'll give you a selection: (1) What do you think about the conflict in the Middle East, namely, the dispute between the Jews and Muslim in Israel? Arial Sharon has profoundly shifted the course of Jewish politics to a very right-wing position. By claiming that Israel must defend their land they hunt settles (children for crying out loud) with Apache Gunships etc. This is very sickening. Also consider that when, say, a little car bomb explodes downtown Jerusalem it's front page in every major newspaper the next day. When in India 300.000 people die as the result of an earthquake the story is printed on page two. Is the Middle East receiving too much attention? (2) To what extent do you think virtual reality can replace real human experiences? For instance, computer simulations (Siedler, Diablo,...) can provoke a variety of emotions in the player. Feelings such as hate, affection, and success originate from the performance in a game. In the future the virtual experience will be intensified as technology advances: cyber space masks are only one example. The End: Sir, once again I apologize for the delay, which contradicts what I've said about writing in the first letter. The weeks ahead should be fairly smooth, thus, I'll be able to reply faster.
Kind Regards Chris
-> go to my answer and the third topic: Virtual Reality