Ethical dilemma: Should knowledge be free? - Michael Vazquez and Will Kanwischer
Learning Stats
سطح CEFR
Total Words
Unique Words
Difficulty
زیرنویسها (82 segments)
DownloadThe mystical city of Ockham is famous for its college of magic.
Here, genius spellcasters invent incantations
and publish them in enchanted scrolls that others can purchase.
As an aspiring wizard, you study these scrolls to learn from the best.
Specifically, you’re interested in making mathematical magic—
like spells that conjure complex shapes—
for researchers to study.
Often, you can’t afford the latest scrolls in your field.
But one day, a friend tells you he's been using an illegal duplication spell
to copy scrolls,
and, if you’re interested,
you’re welcome to read his collection free of charge.
So, do you use his counterfeit scrolls to further your own research?
As a wizard,
you know designing spells requires a lot of intellectual labor and creativity,
which is why it’s widely agreed that mages should be able to make a living
selling their work.
And since this system is also how wizards build their reputation,
most believe it elevates good work
and makes high quality magic reasonably accessible.
But this system has its problems.
In fact, researchers on our less magical world are facing similar issues
with how science is published.
That system's issues are far more complex than Ockham's,
but both share a core philosophical concern:
intellectual property rights.
While many philosophers agree
that some version of intellectual property rights make sense,
their justifications vary widely.
For example, some thinkers draw on English philosopher John Locke,
who argues that if you “mix your labor” with a plot of wild land,
any crops it produces, as well as the land itself,
should be under your control.
This makes a certain kind of sense for farmers,
but are spells, songs, or stories really like farmland?
For one thing, land is limited—
if one person uses it for farming, someone else can’t use it for building.
This kind of all or nothing resource is what some philosophers call
a rivalrous good.
But there’s no limit on how many people can be inspired by a sunset.
And people can even arrive at the same idea independently,
whether or not they share an inspiration.
So if we can all have ideas without interfering with one another,
why assign rights over them at all?
One answer comes from 19th-century philosopher G.W.F. Hegel.
He argues that control over our intellectual creations
is crucial to the quest for personal fulfillment.
For example, musicians making a new song aren't just mixing their labor
with the world—
they’re expressing themselves.
And Hegel believes creators should have the right to control
these creative extensions of their personalities.
By using these ideas without permission or credit,
we’re reducing a creator’s control over their life and legacy.
Alternatively, thinkers like Elizabeth Anderson and Michael Sandel
have argued that commodifying certain things can debase them.
For example, while you might think it’s fine to treat a luxury car
as something to be bought and sold,
it feels strange to say the same thing about a library card.
That attitude feels somehow disrespectful to the pursuit of knowledge.
And taken to the extreme,
one might conclude that all knowledge should be completely free.
But even without compensation,
how would you feel if someone copied your work
and took credit for it as their own?
Outside a world where everyone abandons ownership over their ideas,
it’s hard not to feel like some injustice would still be taking place.
That said, it also feels extreme
to say intellectual property rights should always be respected.
Scottish philosopher David Hume famously argued that, in times of famine,
the government is justified in forcing wealthy citizens to open their granaries
to the public.
During the COVID-19 pandemic,
similar reasoning led publishing companies to temporarily give free access
to journal articles related to the deadly virus.
In such an emergency, most agreed it was in everyone’s interest
to prioritize saving lives over compensation.
But do circumstances need to be this extreme
to justify ignoring intellectual property rights?
Or is your pursuit of knowledge enough for you to deny these mages
their hard-earned coin?
Your friend’s archive is waiting...
Key Vocabulary (50)
toward
"Go to school."
belonging
"Cup of tea."
also
"You and me."
inside
"In the house."
specific
"That book."
A third-person singular pronoun used to refer to an object, animal, or situation that has already been mentioned or is clear from context. It is also frequently used as a dummy subject to talk about time, weather, or distance.
Used to show who is intended to have or use something, or to explain the purpose or reason for an action. It is also frequently used to indicate a specific duration of time.
A preposition used to indicate that something is in a position above and supported by a surface. It is also used to indicate a specific day or date, or to show that a device is functioning.
A preposition used to indicate that people or things are together, in the same place, or performing an action together. It can also describe the instrument used to perform an action or a characteristic that someone or something has.
A conjunction used to compare two things that are equal in some way. It is most commonly used in the pattern 'as + adjective/adverb + as' to show similarity.
Used to refer to the person or people that the speaker is addressing. It is the second-person pronoun used for both singular and plural subjects and objects.
Used to identify a specific person, thing, or idea that is physically close to the speaker or has just been mentioned. It can also refer to the present time or a situation that is currently happening.
A coordinating conjunction used to connect two statements that contrast with each other. It is used to introduce an added statement that is different from what has already been mentioned.
A coordinating conjunction used to connect two or more possibilities or alternatives. it indicates that only one of the options is likely, required, or true.
An is an indefinite article used before singular countable nouns that begin with a vowel sound. It functions to indicate a non-specific person or thing, similar to the number one.
Sign up to unlock full features
Track progress, save vocabulary, and practice exercises
Description
Puzzle through the ethical dilemma of intellectual property rights, and decide: how should we determine ownership of work? -- In the city of Ockham, spellcasters invent incantations and publish...
دستهبندیها
ویدیوهای مرتبط
TED-Ed
