Subject: Re: A one-dimensional universe of sound
Date: Sun Feb 13 2005 - 22:33:03 EST
A high sheer number of choices is likely to offer more "quality" choices than a
small number of choices.
More good is better. More bad is worse.
Choice is good.
More choice is better, Most choice is best.
SO, in the case where you have a choice between thousands of possibilities, you
may only be "free" to choose 10. But in a case where you have thousands of
choices to make, your freedom is temporarily limited to making choices.
I would choose less choices and have a large number of options than more
choices involving few options. With less work to do, I will then increase my
And remember: most is best at being more.
Quoting Steve Layton <email@example.com>:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Gogins" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> To: <email@example.com>
> Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 4:02 PM
> Subject: Re: A one-dimensional universe of sound
> > 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.
> No, you simply have the most possible choices, not the most possible
> freedom. Personal choices from possibilities is freedom, which (maybe
> counter-intuitively) is a selective and limiting activity. Or, we could say,
> a structuring. And, in realistic terms, a finite structuring.
> Given some suitable small number of potentials, the sheer number of choices
> is almost nothing as the opposed to the personal "quality" of those choices.
> And quality is itself an active, selective structuring. History and
> experience show that more does not equal better. And certainly, "most"
> doesn't equal "best".
> Steve Layton
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:06 EST