>> ^chicchorea:

Tried guitars a little as well. Always wanted to play it from a very early age. It was thought it might detract or distract from my piano playing so....
I play neither now for too many years.
How long have you played? What instrument do you have?
In reply to this comment by ZappaDanMan:
I could never connect with the guitar for some reason, the dexterity is insane.. Guess I'm sticking with classical piano. Nice vid.



I've played 7, 2 is constant, piano is main. (mandolin, bass, guitar, piano, drums, accordian, flute). im clasically trained on piano for a long time... learning music is the hard part. Application of music to an instrument is easier. It's just learning the mechanics. You don't forget driving when you drive your friends car.

..yeah there are many problems with the modern teaching methods... I was lucky enough to be introduced to Suzuki method.

I could never connect with the guitar for some reason, the dexterity is insane.. Guess I'm sticking with classical piano. Nice vid.

omg I'd rather see Scott Bakula as Dexter!!!

"Oh Boy!"



Scott Bakula would so make a better Dexter

Al could be the chief

Times like this i ask myself: How would Dexter use this?

Shut up and take my upvotes! This is fantastic! They used the actual Dexter music!

If only all the episodes of Dexter lived up to the sublime quality of the opening sequence.

Here's the story behind the creation of the award-winning opening titles:
http://www.artofthetitle.com/2010/09/27/dexter/

Dexter Saves.

I like his basic utilitarianism, but I think he's off a bit in the terms he's maximizing. I'd say that an ethical choice maximizes the fulfillment of weighted preferences among involved parties. Why preferences? Some people like suffering. Some people may not like suffering, but may choose suffering (for example, they might choose to lose a leg to save a tree.. or something). I believe it's ethical to allow them that choice, that preference. In another case, some people would object to, say, having to take a happy pill, even if it truly made them happy and satisfied. I don't think there's any reason they should have to. It's a small quibble, but important in some cases, I think.

And, to be clear, pretty much everyone is a utilitarian when it comes to an actual ethical dilemma. Jesus recommended pulling an ox out of a mire on the Sabbath. This is a utilitarian resolution to a conflict between rules. Pretty much anyone who claims to be, at root, deontological (such as someone who follows a religious code) is going to fall back to utilitarianism when a conflict arises. It's natural and, in my mind, right. And if you use utilitarianism to resolve conflicts, I think it's the "real" system.

On the flip side, while you can believe in utilitarianism as the true root of ethics, you can't effectively live that way because there are too many decisions and too many consequences to predict. Maybe punching a hobo is just the thing that will get him back on the road to life satisfaction. Maybe stealing a stapler and donating it to a charity is a net good. But you can't effectively live like that, and a society based on everyone making decisions in that way is not going to work - so you need to find personal rules of thumb that lead to a "good" (though not likely best) standard of ethics, and you need societal laws and norms that allow humans to interact in positive ways (while also allowing for exceptional actions when those actions will lead to better outcomes - like speeding to the hospital). So, for example, we have a rule of thumb that says "don't kill people, except in circumstances x, y and z" - and we live that way and don't have to further consider ethical questions about whether we should be killing people on a day to day basis. Unless we're the President. Or Dexter. But I suppose he has the code.

The other sad part is that this basic utilitarianism fails to address many of the ethical questions we actually have. For example, take abortion. The terms we're talking about - preferences, suffering, happiness - when do they kick in? I have my own thoughts on this, but we're out of the realm of "obvious philosophy people should be able to agree on". Similar problem with, say, terminating those in vegetative states. Who's preferences do we count, and how much? What does it mean to "be happy" for someone with minimal brain function?

But anyways, good thoughts in the video, even if I do think he took his time in getting to them.

It would be interesting to me to see the reaction of the country if they actually put this on TV. If Dexter had to go kill a baby killer or something, bet the show would be cancelled immediately.

Personally I hate the idea of Dexter and if I ever meet the actor I'll beat him to death with a lead pipe. I can't say that I haven't ever wanted to sneak into an obviously guilty persons house in the middle of the night though and steal a kitten to even the score.

I'm sure this made it to Dexter's pron directory

Dexterity.

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by chicchorea.

*isdupe>> ^mintbbb:

sorry, a dupe
dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/High-Speed-Robot-Hand-Demonstrates-Dexterity

sorry, a dupe
*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/High-Speed-Robot-Hand-Demonstrates-Dexterity

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by mintbbb. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

Oooh... I picture Dexter making good use of something like this.