Why doesn't it resonate in everyone else? Lots of people don't want to hear Bach. — Patterner
ou're certainly right that we can give more detail about what we like and don't like. But it seems to me it just moves the question down a level. Why do we like or dislike the details?
It's strange sometimes. I like bread. But I like both a soft, fresh loaf, and a multi-grain like Arnold's or Killer Dave. — Patterner
I think Kant means responding to X "as an end-in-itself" (analogous to a moral subject), but I prefer your formulation.I tend to think of disinterested interest as untheorised interest, a term I've often used. Untheorised means responding to something without frameworks or training, intuitively for pleasure and, I guess with disinterest - if by this we mean minus theoretical investment. — Tom Storm
Well, of course, you have to do something with the bread. :grin: Make French toast. (Using only pure maple syrup.) Sandwiches of any sort. I just find it interesting that, regardless of what I do with it, I like breads of opposing qualities for those opposing qualities.bread and Russian novels boring. — Tom Storm
Yup. I can't even imagine what other kind of scenario there could be.But asking why quickly drags us into an infinite regress, each reason presupposes another, and eventually we’re probably left circling back to temperament and taste. — Tom Storm
I could be shown how to listen, what to listen for, and who does it well and who does not do it well — Fire Ologist
Dolly Parton, Evan Bartells, Hank Williams, Johnny Cash — AmadeusD
However, Dolly Parton, Evan Bartells, Hank Williams, Johnny Cash and a handful of others have blown my arse out. — AmadeusD
Do you think that aesthetics in philosophy is a thing? — Moliere
We cannot fully understand the world using reason and logic, as reason and logic only allows us a sequential understanding of the relation between the parts. Reason and logic are sequential, as in the syllogism. Starting with A is leads into B and concludes with C.
In order to appreciate beauty we need to be aware of the whole at one moment in time. — RussellA
Linear thinkers versus wholistic thinkers. — Fire Ologist
Logical objective facts against intuitive subjective feelings.
Absolutism versus relativism.
The truth against my truth. — RussellA
The problem with relativism is that Derain's "Drying the Sails 1905 has an aesthetic value equal to that of Banksy's "Girl with Balloon", which is clearly nonsense. — RussellA
But I think there is a solution to that, and that is, we need to think linearly AND holistically; we all takes wholes and reason linearly about them. — Fire Ologist
I must apply reason and logic to intuitive and aesthetic beliefs. — RussellA
So the interesting question would be, are Derain and Banksy creating within the same tradition? If not, does "clearly nonsense" mean that you do see a tradition-independent criterion for aesthetic value? — J
Does "aesthetic value" in the Bansky language game mean the same thing as "aesthetic value" in the Derain language game? — RussellA
art is like seeds that sprout in the souls of the observers.
if you aren't fond … It's that you're rocky terrain for that particular seed. — frank
That’s another game - a lousy one (to the true art lover) that would be ill-advised to play if you didn’t know how to play the seed sprouting game (because new seeds can sprout for hundreds of years where art is really art, but investment values change for the worse all of the time).The way a piece of art gains value in our world is a reflection of the capitalism that pervades it — frank
‘Seed planting and seed sprouting or not sprouting’ is an analysis of all art. You set up a language game. — Fire Ologist
I would say there's no Bansky or Derain language game. An artist is more like a farmer than an interlocutor. Her art is like seeds that sprout in the souls of the observers. — frank
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.