Re: A one-dimensional universe of sound


Subject: Re: A one-dimensional universe of sound
From: Michael Gogins (gogins@pipeline.com)
Date: Sat Feb 12 2005 - 19:02:10 EST


In the simplest case I have only one choice, I am not free. In the next case
I have two choices, I am free. In the next case I have three choices, I am
more free than with two. With an infinite number of choices I have the most
possible freedom. This is just common sense.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Layton" <dalgas@speakeasy.net>
To: <cec-conference@concordia.ca>
Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 11:52 AM
Subject: Re: A one-dimensional universe of sound

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Gogins" <gogins@pipeline.com>
> To: <cec-conference@concordia.ca>
> Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 7:34 AM
> Subject: Re: A one-dimensional universe of sound
>
>
> [...]
>> In arguing about the size (i.e. the complexity) of the art of music, I am
>> arguing about freedom. Finitude is unfreedom, infinity is freedom --
>> unlimited possibility. My arguments try to counter what I see as a
>> formalistic, idealistic spirit in contemporary culture by demonstrating
>> that the assumptions of formalism entail finitude, which is a lack of
>> freedom.
>
> Well, the problem I see is equating "freedom" with "unlimited possibility"
> and "unfreedom" with "finitude". It just doesn't work. Freedom can happen
> in either, and might not appear at all even in the infinite.
>
> Steve Layton
> http://www.niwo.com/steve
>
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:06 EST