[ExI] The Anti-Flynn
anders at aleph.se
Wed Apr 29 09:58:53 UTC 2015
Tara Maya <tara at taramayastales.com> , 29/4/2015 1:56 AM:
In addition, I’ve read Murray’s works on the supposed distribution of genius, invention and works of art and I don’t agree with him at all that his standards are “objective.” On the contrary, any modern inventions and modern forms of art are discounted and degenerated. So if Mozart counts as a musical genius but a rap star doesn’t and the printing press counts as an invention but a new app for the iPad doesn’t, then OF COURSE it appears there were more “works of genius” in the past than among these good-for-nothing hooligan youngsters.
Where does he claim that? In Human Excellence he deliberately ignores recent decades for methodological reasons (the data would likely be biased in complex ways due to recency).
The problem of judging the importance of inventions is a pretty deep one.
Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat