there's millions and millions of pages in which people explain all of the ways in which Shakespeare is deep and complex and artistically great. — NKBJ
You see, all these papers and articles and books are page after page and word after word of evidence. These are people who have meticulously documented Shakespeare's greatness. — NKBJ
Do you understand the word "crude"? Because I was certainly not that. — NKBJ
In any case, I am STILL waiting for anyone to explain the ways in which Bay's movies are anywhere near as deep as Hamlet? Or are you just gonna hang your hat on the "entertaining to me" peg? — NKBJ
You see, all these papers and articles and books are page after page and word after word of evidence. These are people who have meticulously documented Shakespeare's greatness. If even half of it is true, he's much better than Bay. By the way, I'm still waiting on anyone offering such evidence in Bay's support? — NKBJ
On your view, by the way, you wouldn't be able to make sense of me saying "That's not what I meant." That's a pretty common thing for people to say, which makes it problematic to not be able to make sense of it. — Terrapin Station
What would be true is that those folks feel that Shakespeare is great for the reasons they give. — Terrapin Station
We can't give evidence that Bay is better than Shakespeare--or worse than Shakespeare--outside of someone liking one or the other more, because there are no facts about one being better than the other aside from that. — Terrapin Station
Yes, and there's millions and millions of pages explaining how the bible or the quoran are true and worth following writtenby expert theologians (undoubtedly more than there is commentary on Shakespeare). Does that make what they write any more true? No wait...theology is different to art so that makes whatever you want to say about art automatically right and any analogy I draw automatically wrong. — Isaac
At no point in time does the subjective content of someone's thought become objective fact. — Isaac
You know Peter Pan was a story, right? — Isaac
It's really simple. If people think/obtain what they believe are 'deep' thoughts about a Michael Bay film, but obtain fewer from Hamlet, then for them Michael Bay movies are more deep than Hamlet. — Isaac
They're not writing about their "feelings." — NKBJ
HOWEVER, there are things like philosophical breadth and depth that Bay just doesn't measure up to. — NKBJ
By your logic, there is no way to measure the difference in quality between a personal essay by an average middle schooler and Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. — NKBJ
It's all just how you "feel" about it. — NKBJ
Nevermind that if you actually look at the texts, instead of just blustering here because you like the idea that all opinions and "feelings" are equal, — NKBJ
it's just obvious which one contains more thought, more ideas, more insight. — NKBJ
And frankly, I can't take anyone seriously who wants to maintain that the middle school paper and the Kant text are equal. — NKBJ
We're not getting anywhere here. We're just talking in circles. Let me know when you have something new to add. In the meantime, I'll just agree to disagree. — NKBJ
You should have corrected your straw mannish misconceptions at least, but I guess that's too much work. — Terrapin Station
you claim that I think that there's no way to judge/measure works, morals, etc. or the next time you claim that I think all works/moral stances/etc. are equal. — Terrapin Station
You claimed that. — NKBJ
Oh dear. I see you're thoroughly confused now.
But I'm afraid I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain to you all the times and ways in which you did say what you are now denying you said.
Sorry, but arguing with someone like you is just a waste of time. — NKBJ
Another false analogy. — NKBJ
But the fact that millions of people and theologians have found meaning in the Quran and the Bible does give evidence that these are more meaningful than "Transformers" ever could be. — NKBJ
These aren't just subjective opinions. — NKBJ
You're conflating two entirely different concepts: understanding that a text contains a certain level of depth and thought and insight, versus thinking that the story itself is true. Not sure how you made that jump, but it's definitely moving in a strawperson direction. — NKBJ
There is more possible depth for them to find in Hamlet than Transformers. And it doesn't matter that someone is too immature to spend some time with Hamlet. The fact is that the depth is there for anyone who is willing to explore it. Bays movies simply cannot provide that. — NKBJ
Cave A is a hundred times longer and deeper than cave B. Just because a person explores the entire cave B and merely glances at cave A doesn't mean cave B is magically deeper and longer. To that person it may seem that way, but that doesn't make it true. — NKBJ
Well, or at least your mistaken beliefs about what my views even are, apparently. Maybe in the future, not necessarily with me, try to not be so quick to judge, so quick to stick someone on a particular template, and take the time to listen and think about what they're saying? — Terrapin Station
No, I haven't. Never seriously studied English literature.
Any interest in actually addressing the argument, or is there anything else about my academic career you'd like to know first? — Isaac
We're not talking about whether everything Shakespeare said was true. — NKBJ
There are degrees of objectivity. — Baden
There are degrees of objectivity. — Baden
Those who have argued that Shakespeare is a great writer have provided millions of words of evidence why. — Baden
Do things become more objective the more people believe them (that seems fraught with social and political problems to me), — Isaac
So what's your reasoning for believing that? How would such a system work for you? Do things become more objective the more people believe them (that seems fraught with social and political problems to me), or do things become more objective the more justification someone can give (if so, how do we decide what justification counts without succumbing to the problems of the first option)? I'm just not seeing how this scalar objectivity would work. — Isaac
I could (in theory) over the next few weeks write millions of words about Michael Bay's films, would the quality of his films actually change as I write the words? — Isaac
Whether or not we can agree, it is not senseless to have the debate. We can give reasons based on what art is and what it's supposed to do with reference to the genre it's a part of. — Baden
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.