"Good Artists Copy. Great Artists Steal.” Pablo Picasso said that. Or did he? Steve Jobs seemed to think so. In 1988, the Sydney Morning Herald quoted Jobs as using Picasso's line for inspiration while developing Macintosh. But further digging finds variations of the quote attributed to Igor Stravinsky, William Faulkner, and The Gentleman’s Magazine of 1892, among others. It's certainly ironic that this quote has been “stolen” by so many over the years. Who should it rightly be attributed to?
In the art world, artists regularly take the work of others and make it their own. There’s even a movement about it called “Everything is a Remix.” Is it right that stealing should be justified as inspiration? Is repurposing the art of others for one's own a type of collaboration?
In business, one can be sued for ripping off the ideas of others. Just as Mark Zuckerberg. But where do we draw the line when it comes to art?
“Every profession has a code of ethics. Doctors have a code of ethics - the Hippocratic Oath - lawyers, accountants, journalists. In fact part of a profession is that there is a code of ethics,” says James Abruzzo, the co-founder of the Institute for Ethical Leadership at Rutgers Business School, which is hosting the Ethical Leadership Conference on June 6th. But there is no code of ethics when it comes to art.
The freedom that this allows may seem suited for the highly subjective, boundary-pushing world of art. But in this clip from Big Think's interview, Abruzzo presents compelling case studies that show why he argues for the art world to finally establish its own code of ethics.
Research in plant neurobiology shows that plants have senses, intelligence and emotions.
- The field of plant neurobiology studies the complex behavior of plants.
- Plants were found to have 15-20 senses, including many like humans.
- Some argue that plants may have awareness and intelligence, while detractors persist.
Most people think human extinction would be bad. These people aren't philosophers.
- A new opinion piece in The New York Times argues that humanity is so horrible to other forms of life that our extinction wouldn't be all that bad, morally speaking.
- The author, Dr. Todd May, is a philosopher who is known for advising the writers of The Good Place.
- The idea of human extinction is a big one, with lots of disagreement on its moral value.
Since the idea of locality is dead, space itself may not be an aloof vacuum: Something welds things together, even at great distances.
- Realists believe that there is an exactly understandable way the world is — one that describes processes independent of our intervention. Anti-realists, however, believe realism is too ambitious — too hard. They believe we pragmatically describe our interactions with nature — not truths that are independent of us.
- In nature, properties of Particle B may depend on what we choose to measure or manipulate with Particle A, even at great distances.
- In quantum mechanics, there is no explanation for this. "It just comes out that way," says Smolin. Realists struggle with this because it would imply certain things can travel faster than light, which still seems improbable.