@Hanover

For the record, i am also pinging you.

To quickly finish what was said here , as indicated in the same: — skyblack

To begin with, art experience is transient. — skyblack

In the initial thread, it seemed the discussion related to how one could have a meaningful aesthetic experience, but then there was, in my opinion, an evasion of what it meant to have an aesthetic experience and some amount of combativeness in terms of offering an explanation, and that then resulted in that thread being closed.

This post appears to be a more specific discussion of Schopenhauer's aesthetics, if I've read this correctly, although there isn't any mention of him. Other than recognizing it as such, Schopenhauer isn't someone I know enough about to really contribute.

What I can say about the general idea of the thread is that I don't share your despondency, and so the need to find an escape (through art or otherwise) has no appeal. I appreciate the need by some for self-medication and vice in order to numb themselves from reality. It's also obvious that dependency or addiction could be a consequence and that would lead to a greater unhappiness.

I think the typical response to the question of how much and how often one should take a metaphorical drink of alcohol without exposing themselves to the negative consequences would be to drink in moderation. Moderation means rationally controlling your urges, which for some is easy and others impossible.

But like I said, you premise the conversation that that there is this need to escape the reality we're in, and unless one buys into that basic premise, this discussion becomes a conversation about finding a cure for which there is no illness.

Looking at the issue thus one is faced with a natural question, what then is the nature of an aesthetic contemplation, if we will care to call it that, which is free from the dependencies on external stimuli, the risk of addiction, and the desire for its continuity in time? An aesthetic contemplation which is free from the residues of “experience” (ironically) and “knowledge”? — skyblack

That would be pure art.

(Leaving off at this one sentence precisely because to say anything more would negate pure art.)

Drink all of the wine, drink none of the wine or drink some of the wine.

The question of moderation is then understanding what drinking all of the wine is like and what drinking none of the wine is like. Moderation can only truly be moderate if the extreme ends are understood to some relative degree.

How much should ‘some wine’ be for one to drink a moderate amount. Can we assess such without first drinking too much and too little.

How much should ‘some wine’ be for one to drink a moderate amount — I like sushi

Moderate drinking is defined fairly clearly in clinical services as 2 to 4 standard drinks in a single day. No more than 10 standard drinks a week. You don't even need to be a drinker to understand this. But standards such as these are intended as guidelines only, they are not divine judgement.

The question of moderation is then understanding what drinking all of the wine is like and what drinking none of the wine is like. Moderation can only truly be moderate if the extreme ends are understood to some relative degree. — I like sushi

Sure, and I can't know what cyanide does unless I try it because there's no other way to obtain information.

cyanide — Hanover

Choking...chemically! :fear:

Transcendentalia

1. Verum (Truth/Satyam)
2. Bonum (Good/Shivam)
3. Pulchrum (Beauty/Sundaram)

We're all, men & women, in search of the ideal mate: a looker, good, and truthful (faithful?).

We all want to tie the knot as it were. Monogamy as a subtext.

Whaddaya know, Freud hit the bullseye (eros/libido)!

It's all about the two backed beast! There's sex and there's Tantric Sex!

@Tom Storm@"Hanover” a metaphor is not meant to be taken literally.

OK. I was actually responding to your comment on his comment about the need for personal experience :up:

You intentionally avoid the aesthetics of physical movement. To sit and stare at paintings or sculptures or listen to music while in a recliner, in the long run seems boring. But I suppose there are those who enter some kind of zone of contemplation, pleasing and seductive.

As you watch a skilled gymnast you become active in a sense, and the gymnast experiences a kinaesthetic pleasure from performing.

Transcendentalia

1. Verum/Satyam (truth)
2. Bonum (Good/Shivam)
3. Pulchrum (Beauty/Sundaram) — Agent Smith

Dear AS, maybe it's better to stick to your lemonade! :lol:

Although. Ethics, aesthetics, ontology!

However, an aesthetic contemplation/experience has certain limitations. — skyblack

I generally find art more confronting and uncomfortable than real life, so I generally avoid it. The idea of aesthetic contemplation does not seem restful or preferable to just getting on with it.

The linked thread, especially the last para, will clear your objection.

Being a moderator, he knows...

Dear AS, maybe it's better to stick to your lemonade! :lol: — Hillary

:lol: Sound advice!

Addendum to OP:

Just like the initial thread (linked in op) can't be thoroughly understood unless opened, likewise this thread (the critique) cannot be understood unless elaborated. The first thread is for those who are walking and exploring the aesthetic experience. This thread is for those that have reached the frontiers of aesthetic contemplation and now wondering about the beyond. This thread is completely related and in context with the first thread, simply a completion.

Beauty is unpossessed Wholeness. Seen and desired as an object it is used, perverted and lost by incompleteness, the partial ego, the dualistic mind: by beauty the ego is challenged; it must either surrender or devour.

For achieved Wholeness, all is beauty: rather, one lives the essence of beauty-Delight: Beauty is no longer formal, an object for the ego, but pure experience; then all form is lyrical.

art experience is transient. — skyblack

All experience is transient.

To sit and stare at paintings or sculptures or listen to music while in a recliner, in the long run seems boring. — jgill

Then you do not like paintings.

All experience is transient. — Jackson

Right.

An aesthetic contemplation which is free from the residues of “experience” (ironically) and “knowledge”? — skyblack

Why would anyone want that?

Right. — skyblack

Which is why one had pointed it in op.

Why would anyone want that? — Jackson

Both threads have explained the "why".

Both threads have explained the "why". — skyblack

Then nothing further to discuss.

Then nothing further to discuss. — Jackson

That is correct. Unless one feels there is a genuine interest to explore, accompanied with the right attitude that facilitates such inquiry.

For Reason every actual beauty must be accidental.

So long as it does not recognize its limits Reason is romantic.

Actual beauty is rational only by complete freedom from egoism. That is, it is transrational, Magical

For Reason everyactual beauty must be accidental. — skyblack

Why must it be that way for Reason?

To continue from above, prevent systematization,

The complete artist, for whom all forms and mode of expression have become arbitrary, is now completely present in his own right, he possesses his inaccessibility beyond them, his secrecy and immediacy are complete. He appears only formally, he has become what he always was, Invisible.

you clearly are not here for discussion — Jackson

Not everyone is here to discuss. The forum makes a fine notebook. :smile: