Oh, I'm well aware of the terrible burden on artists and others who do not make
money a priority. My remarks were intended to be directed toward the
possibilities if we did not live in a profit-oriented society.
Selma Singer
r h wrote:
> Selma,
>
> Money is a necessity but so is work. The problem for me is that I work
> whether I am paid or not. I work to accomplish an artistic goal. But I
> do need money and will only live as long as I have it to do my work. They
> reason for life is accomplishment and anyone who does so merely for money is
> beyond my experience.
>
> Ray Evans Harrell
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Selma Singer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "r h" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: "Brad McCormick, Ed.D." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Richard Caves"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Keith E. Maskus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Charles Brass" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2001 6:21 PM
> Subject: Re: Who pays, who benefits?
>
> > If money were not the major incentive for doing anything, we wouldn't have
> to
> > worry about 'intellectual property'. Ideas and creative products would be
> shared
> > with delight because it could only lead to more creativity and the
> production of
> > more ideas.
> >
> > Selma Singer
> >
> > r h wrote:
> >
> > > Good point Selma,
> > >
> > > To this point I would add a beautiful computer software that cannot be
> > > protected or a scientific formula that is copywrited only in one
> country.
> > > The issues of Intellectual Capital are covered in the works of Keith
> Maskus.
> > > The book is "Intellectual Prorperty rights in the Global Economy" Pub.
> > > Institute for International Economics and some other works of his on the
> > > Internet under his name. He teaches at the Univ. of Colorado and is
> state
> > > of the art on this issue. Another would be Richard Caves of Harvard
> who
> > > has addressed the same issues under "Creative Industries, Contacts
> between
> > > Art and Commerce" Harvard U. Press
> > >
> > > Brad this has gone a lot beyond the general statements you are making.
> > > What was a problem with the work of the Arts is now, in the Information
> Era,
> > > a problem of almost all Informational Products. In the past you
> could
> > > escape the issues because it was not a factory, retail or a school but
> today
> > > the issues that have plagued arts economics since Adam Smith and John
> Stuart
> > > Mill are now a huge problem for creativity in the TNC economy. Not a
> bad
> > > idea for a serious future of work list to contemplate IMHO.
> > >
> > > Ray Evans Harrell
> > > Magic Circle Opera Repertory Ensemble, Inc.
> > > New York City
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Selma Singer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: "Brad McCormick, Ed.D." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Cc: "Charles Brass" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2001 1:03 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Who pays, who benefits?
> > >
> > > > Would a beautiful painting be considered a 'new idea"? How about a
> > > beautiful
> > > > rendition of some kind of music or a poem or a beautifully cleaned
> home or
> > > how
> > > > about a new recipe for bread? What about the development of a person
> who
> > > is
> > > > able to radiate a kind of energy that brings out the best in people
> around
> > > > her/him
> > > >
> > > > Are the energies that go into these kinds of products (?) to be
> considered
> > > > work?
> > > >
> > > > I refer people once again to the Boston Globe article about the women
> > > > economists who are trying to redefine the very basis of economics in
> terms
> > > of
> > > > both the work to be done and the reasons people do it.
> > > >
> > > > Selma Singer
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Brad McCormick, Ed.D. wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Selma Singer wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I simply cannot understand why people confuse equality and
> sameness.
> > > Will
> > > > > > someone try to explain to me how allowing people equal opportunity
> to
> > > > > > develop their uniqueness will, ipso facto, result in everyone
> being
> > > the
> > > > > > same?
> > > > > [snip]
> > > > >
> > > > > I would once again encourage anyone with good library resources to
> > > > > read the eloquent and magisterial essay:
> > > > >
> > > > > Szczepanski, J. (1981). Individuality and society.
> > > > > Impact of science on society, 31(4), 461-466.
> > > > >
> > > > > Szczepanski distinguishes between:
> > > > >
> > > > > (1) "individualism" which
> > > > > he associates with competition between persons to each
> > > > > grab as big a piece of the existing pie as they can, and
> > > > >
> > > > > (2) "individuality" which he associates with having a
> > > > > new idea. A new idea is something which is absolutely
> > > > > unique, by definition, since it cannot be found anywhere
> > > > > that already exists (if it could, it wouldn't be *new*).
> > > > > A new idea makes me different without taking anything
> > > > > away from anyone else.
> > > > > And a new idea can, as a miracle of loaves and fishes,
> > > > > create new pies, so that all can have more.
> > > > >
> > > > > Szczepanski concludes his essay by expressing the
> > > > > hope that individuality shall flourish among us, and
> > > > > quotes Tertullian: "Credo quia absurdum"
> > > > >
> > > > > +\brad mccormick
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Let your light so shine before men,
> > > > > that they may see your good works.... (Matt 5:16)
> > > > >
> > > > > Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21)
> > > > >
> > > > > <![%THINK;[SGML+APL]]> Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > 914.238.0788 / 27 Poillon Rd, Chappaqua NY 10514-3403 USA
> > > > > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > Visit my website ==> http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
