What isn't? — Tate

Very little to nothing is self evident. As one philosopher said, if anything was self evident there would be no philosophy.

Very little to nothing is self evident. As one philosopher said, if anything was self evident there would be no philosophy. — Jackson

I think the philosopher said that if we argued for everything, we'd fall into an infinite regress after the first step.

I think the philosopher said that if we argued for everything, we'd fall into an infinite regress after the first step. — Tate

No, not what he said. But I forget his name.

No, not what he said. But I forget his name. — Jackson

Aristotle: Knowledge does not require an infinite regress of questions.

Aristotle: Knowledge does not require an infinite regress of questions. — Tate

Aristotle never said that. Cite something if you have it.

Read this.

Read this. — Tate

Citation means, post the text of Aristotle with its source. "Read this," is not an argument.

It's in the SEP article. Since you weren't aware of Aristotle's stance on knowledge and regress, I thought you might appreciate the accompanying explanation.

It's in the SEP article. Since you weren't aware of Aristotle's stance on knowledge and regress, I thought you might appreciate the accompanying explanation. — Tate

I see you have no idea how to make an argument.

I see you have no idea how to make an argument. — Jackson

I see you're a troll.

I see you're a troll. — Tate

Then we are done.

No; whatever "heart" is. — Jackson

It's not for everybody! :smile:

It's not for everybody — Agent Smith

What is not for everybody?

Something, but not a lot. I never understood why people think art is about beauty. — Jackson

Re Beauty and the Sublime


"According to Burke, the Beautiful is that which is well-formed and aesthetically pleasing, whereas the Sublime is that which has the power to compel and destroy us. The preference for the Sublime over the Beautiful was to mark the transition from the Neoclassical to the Romantic era."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Philosophical_Enquiry_into_the_Origin_of_Our_Ideas_of_the_Sublime_and_Beautiful

"According to Burke, the Beautiful is that which is well-formed and aesthetically pleasing, whereas the Sublime is that which has the power to compel and destroy us. The preference for the Sublime over the Beautiful was to mark the transition from the Neoclassical to the Romantic era." — ZzzoneiroCosm

I guess. I never got much from Burke.

What is not for everybody? — Jackson

Never mind! Good day. How's your cat?

I guess. I never got much from Burke. — Jackson

Have you read the book?

Have you read the book? — ZzzoneiroCosm

What book?

What book? — Jackson

A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful

The book I cited above.

A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful — ZzzoneiroCosm

Years ago I read Burke. Not the whole book, no.

At any rate, the ascendance of ugliness in art is a fascinating shift. The psychology of it.

https://www.atlassociety.org/post/why-art-became-ugly

It has some link to Freud and to the popularization of the notion of the unconscious - the artist's attempt to paint the unconscious.

If you're skeptical or interested I can find you a source.

If you're skeptical or interested I can find you a source. — ZzzoneiroCosm

Ugliness is not new--Greek tragedies can get pretty ugly.

Sure.

But the special sort of grotesque, bizarre Modernist ugliness has no precedent I'm aware of - apart from the immemorial access to the unconscious via dreams.

bizarre Modernist ugliness — ZzzoneiroCosm

Example?

Example? — Jackson

Surrealism was a conscious attempt to extract an image of the unconscious. Dada as well. Automatic writing: letting the unconscious take the wheel.

I imagine the ancient Greeks - whose tragedies I adore - especially Lattimore's marvelous translations, which retain the old Greek cadence - would be wholly bewildered by automatic writing, by Lautreamont's Maldoror, or by anything from the pen of Gertrude Stein (among others).

I imagine the ancient Greeks - whose tragedies I adore - especially Lattimore's marvelous translations, which retain the old Greek cadence - would be wholly bewildered by automatic writing, by Lautreamont's Maldoror, or by anything from the pen of Gertrude Stein, among others. — ZzzoneiroCosm

Poking your eyes out seems grotesque. I don't think most people consider Stein's writing to be ugly.

I see you're a troll. — Tate

Jackson started the thread. That makes you the troll.

Sure, grotesque. And the mythological resonances are part of our heritage of unconscious types and archetypes. But there is a clear line between poking one's eyes out, fucking your mom, being born from the balls of a castrated god, having your spleen perpetually eaten by a wild bird - all of which inspire a horror of the physical - and the psychological sublimity of Dali's stilted elephants and melting clocks and, above all - his grotesque Unnamables.

Dali's presentation of grotesque unnamables has a link to the schizophrenic's experience of the name-loss of objects - this ascendant schizoidal experience of reality may well be the line I have in mind.


Plenty of folks find Stein unreadably ugly.

Plenty of folks find Stein unreadably ugly. — ZzzoneiroCosm

I do not.

I see you're a troll.
— Tate

Jackson started the thread. That makes you the troll. — T Clark

Could be. I'm the troll spouting Aristotle. Sorry.