The intro to Blade Runner 2049 is something marvelous.

Does a bird know it's beautiful?

[And what happend to ?]

I agree completely.



Whoever decided that those three guys should go out on the runway looking like that should be taken away and not be heard of again.

I agree completely.

I agree that the images are beautiful, and the music actually contributes more to the emotional mood than the visuals do. It's a great opening sequence, and the following sequence is incredibly done. Overall, though, the movie I thought was a let down; disappointing ending, and just a cash-cow milking of the original, which was a cash-cow milking of the PKD novel of another name.

Btw, what do you agree about? Do you think the bird knows that it's beautiful, or does it not know?

[Delete] @Baden

If that was a solid joke I'd laugh along, but for real; does the bird know it's beautiful?

[Delete] @Baden

Even further; how would a bird even know about "beauty"?

[Delete] @Baden

What?

[Delete] @Baden

"Belief" and "beauty" suggest abstraction. There's no reason to suppose animals possess these things (thus abstraction); I guess they'd be able to paint cave paintings or construct obelisks otherwise.

[Delete] @Baden

Maybe; but the nest serves a utilitarian purpose, or at least it serves our conception of what a utilitarian purpose would be for a bird. But even if the bird does derive, somehow, a metaphysical sense of aesthetics from the nest, how do we translate that? Does the bird know of it's own beauty, for instance, in the way that we know of it's beauty? The bird knows nothing of it's National-Geographic-potential beauty.

[Delete] @Baden

The point I try to make is that the bird isn't aware of the beauty that we see in the bird. We see something that is categorically not apprehensible to the bird. We see something more beautiful in the bird than the bird's experience of beauty for itself. And, for myself, I like to ask whether this same principle applies to us humans. Maybe not. Maybe so.

[Delete] @Baden

maybe other creatures think of us as uglier than we think of ourselves. For example, cockroaches find humans so disgusting they run away and if they are touched by humans they wash themselves. — René Descartes

That seems fanciful; I'm taking a simple experience of the beauty of a bird, and then magnifying it one "level" higher in my analogy; primitive philosophy, maybe, but simple. Your suggestion here just seems to be a joke.

how are you sure that
We see something more beautiful in the bird than the bird's experience of beauty for itself.
— Noble Dust — René Descartes

Because the bird doesn't see itself within the complex aesthetic system within which we see it.

[Delete] @Baden

Simple observation. When I see a beautiful bird, my experience of beauty is formed by all my previous, human experiences of beauty; experiences of the beauty of birds, of music, of nature, of the opposite (or same) sex, or symmetry...these experiences of beauty are human; they aren't "birdian"; at the most, we could imagine a bird seeing a member of it's opposite sex (for pro-creation), or it's children, or nature itself as being "beautiful"; but this pales in comparison to the depth and complexity of beauty that we experience as people.

And on top of that, there's a self-evident hierarchy of beauty; the bird sees its's beautiful mate, we see the beautiful bird (and the beautiful wood, or weather, etc), and then, there's the possibility that a higher form of conciousness sees the beauty in us which we cannot see.

Does a bird know it's beautiful? — Noble Dust

This bird is not just beautiful but it is a bad ass for choosing it's lunch. :D

I agree that the images are beautiful, and the music actually contributes more to the emotional mood than the visuals do. It's a great opening sequence, and the following sequence where he retires the farming replicant is incredibly done. Overall, though, the movie I thought was a let down; disappointing ending, and just a cash-cow milking of the original, which was a cash-cow milking of the PKD novel of another name. — Noble Dust

Well, I would have to disagree with calling Blade Runner 2049 a cash cow. The director, Denis Villeneuve, made it abundantly clear that the movie wasn't made to make money. Besides the original Blade Runner was a box office flop too. Many people were spellbound with the sequel, by which I mean that it was worthy of a follow up on the original. I know I loved it at least.

I was agreeing with "deleted".

I am not a big dog person, but these are really beautiful. Great photography too.

I wonder if this is the most beautiful thing I've ever seen. A wren?

I'm not sure. Btw, I like how your participation on the forum culminated with this thread; from philosophical enquiry to pure beauty.

This thread has meant more to me than I can say. I don't even know why. It goes straight to my heart.