I just don’t see how this is in any way a radical idea. — praxis

Well, look at most aesthetics today and it is mostly Kantian--the oppposite of Nietzsche.

And I don't think any philosopher in history is "radical" in so far as they build on previous work.

What you mean or the history? Please elaborate either way. — praxis

The aesthetics of production has nothing to do with art for art sake. Like I said, it is about meaning and the production of meaning.

Art for art’s sake, if that’s your meaning, predates FN. — praxis

Absolutely not. Just the opposite.

What does that mean? — praxis

Making art is different from looking at it. Most aesthetics is about the finished product and ideas of beauty. Making art is more about making meaning. The artist is not trying to make a beautiful object, but produce something that says something about how the world is.

what were his most radical ideas — Joshs

"Art is life's metaphysical activity." (Will to Power; forget what section).

Nietzsche was one of the few philosophers, with Hegel, who actually understood what art is. He said an aesthetics of production is needed because people only talk about the aesthetics of reception.

"In an essay adapted for the Book Review last year, Henry Louis Gates Jr. warned, “whenever we treat an identity as something to be fenced off from those of another identity, we sell short the human imagination.” People can successfully project themselves into the lives of others. That is what art is meant to do — cross boundaries, engender empathy with other people, bridge the differences between author and reader, one human and another."

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/24/opinion/lived-experience-empathy-culture.html

Picasso said, some artists borrow but I steal.

But sometimes there is justice in claims of cultural exploitation and expropriation too. — unenlightened

Agree. Not trying to be silly here, but didn't Christians 'steal' Jesus from the Jews?

According to which culture? — unenlightened

Maybe that is the problem, absolute boundary of a culture.

There is a kernel of justified complaint when the white industrial complex ignores black musicians but exploits black music as with Elvis for example. Or when companies try and patent traditional medicines like neem. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4333627.stm

I don't know where the cultural lines should be drawn, but somewhere around exploitation and oppression. — unenlightened

Some complained that a white, female artist has no right to depict a Black male, Emmett Till. This is not good logic.

It is nonsense to say only x can talk aboud x is what I meant. Busy atm … will read later — I like sushi

Okay, until then.

In the OP — I like sushi

It is not nonsense. But if you don't have time then respond when you do.

Based purely on that snippet it is nonsense. I will read later — I like sushi

What snippet?

It is a completely paradox since it starts. They seek for attention in their own identity while they mistreat the others ones — javi2541997

Am I supposed to identify with every White Male? Is Donald Trump my identity group?! I have contempt for him. There is a deeper problem here with the very concept of identity.

Nah, you're trying to make the fact that it's fictional mean that every fact contained in it is false. To be fictional simply means the factual claims in the book need not be true for the relevance of the story, but it doesn't require they be false. — Hanover

If you are saying the Bible is fictional the same way Shakespeare's Hamlet is fictional then I would agree.

No. — Hanover

The Bible lied?

It's always people who do the slayings, whether in the name of God or, more topically, Putin. At least we can define God as the good and deny unholy acts are decreed by him, but only falsely in his name. The same cannot be said of Putin. He is not an ideal or representation of the good. — Hanover

Didn't God flood the world?

Identity politics is a type of group solipsism. You can only understand yourself as a member of a social group.

What a survivor can bring to an account of the Holocaust is personal experience. Personal experience alone is insufficient. One must also have the capacity to tell the story. Having personal experiences of any kind and being able to communicate what that experience was like just isn't that easy to do well. — Bitter Crank

I am quite familiar with the Dana Schutz controversy. The museum stood by her:

“The 2017 Whitney Biennial brings to light many facets of the human experience, including conditions that are painful or difficult to confront such as violence, racism, and death. Many artists in the exhibition push in on these issues, seeking empathetic connections in an especially divisive time. Dana Schutz’s painting, Open Casket (2016), is an unsettling image that speaks to the long-standing violence that has been inflicted upon African Americans. For many African Americans in particular, this image has tremendous emotional resonance. By exhibiting the painting, we wanted to acknowledge the importance of this extremely consequential and solemn image in American and African American history and the history of race relations in this country. As curators of this exhibition we believe in providing a museum platform for artists to explore these critical issues.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2017/03/23/dana-schutz-responds-to-outcry-over-her-controversial-emmett-till-painting/

Good. You concede you "have the experience of being a biped." Biped - that's one quality you possess. You have other qualities too: maleness and whiteness.

The burden is on you to explain how you manage to "have the experience of being a biped" while not having the experience of being white and male. All three are qualities you possess. — ZzzoneiroCosm

What is white male experience?

Your are a white male; you have experiences; they are, of necessity, the experiences of a white male — Bitter Crank

I have the experience of being a biped, too.

Hume was a critic of the concept of identity. Even a person is not identical to itself.

Opening paragraph of the article:

"Did Dana Schutz, a white artist, have the right to paint Emmett Till? Was it fair that a white historian, David Blight, won a Pulitzer for his biography of Frederick Douglass? Should Steven Spielberg and Tony Kushner be the ones to update “West Side Story,” a musical conceived by four Jewish men but fundamentally about Puerto Rican lives?"

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/24/opinion/lived-experience-empathy-culture.html

I think you were saying that you don't consider your life different because of race or gender? — Gregory

Where did I say that?

T — ZzzoneiroCosm

Then your assertion rings disingenuous, silly, tendentious. It's clear you have an agenda. Enjoy. — ZzzoneiroCosm

You should not be on a philosophy forum.

The books are labeled according to Greek letters. Are you referring to Lambda or Mu? — Paine

Mu

Are you a white male? — ZzzoneiroCosm

Yes.

Do you know what it feels like not to be a white male? — ZzzoneiroCosm

I do not know what it feels like to be a white male.

This raises questions for epistemology and ethics, let alone aesthetics.
Does being a white male mean you have white male experience? I have no idea what that means.

What I proposed does not necessarily mean that I believe in an afterlife. I simply wanted to investigate the implications a certain interpretation of the meaning of eternity would have on an afterlife if one assumed it existed. — charles ferraro

Why think about something you don't believe in?

If eternity is defined as the absence or negation of time, rather than simply as an unending future, then what implications would this have for my life after death?

Eternal life would not simply mean an unending future life but, rather, a life unfettered by time, freed from the temporal dimensions of past, present, and future.

Upon my death, I would not merely encounter in heaven only those persons who died before me, but I would also encounter in heaven all those persons who I thought I was leaving behind, and I would also encounter in heaven all those persons who would be my future descendants.

Any comments about this? — charles ferraro

Why do you believe in an after life?

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. I'll try to make clear what makes sense to me. I'm with Hume, at least as I understand him based very limited experience. It doesn't make sense to call knowledge a priori if it's dependent on knowledge based on experience. I don't see how that is different from what is called a posteriori knowledge. — T Clark

Hume is smarter than Kant. Kant was just an authoritarian.

Those who have experimented with psychedelics often describe a sensation of connectedness with objects around them, things like rocks, trees, or rivers. Sometimes the "connectedness" is more literal, as high doses of psychedelic drugs like LSD may cause users to believe the walls are talking to them.
[Eric Schank, SALON] — jgill

Good point.

I don't know what texts you are referring to assert these statements with such certainty. — Paine

Aristotle,Metaphysics, Book XII, sections 7 and 9.

Yes, I get the unmoved part. Where in Aquinas does he suggest this agency is not an 'efficient cause'? — Paine

St Thomas is not attributing to Aristotle that his concept of God (Prime Mover) was an efficient cause. It seems quite clear that for Aristotle God has no agency.

Please cite where you read this in Aquinas. From the point of view in Aristotle, referring to an 'unmoved' mover is the ultimate image of an efficient cause. — Paine

The Summa. St Thomas refers to Aristotle as "The Philosopher." I do not remember exactly the section, but he says The Church believes the world was created, without saying Aristotle was wrong.

Prime Mover. The Prime Mover does not move. There are many unmoved movers. Only one Prime Unmoved Mover.

To give it a push. — Haglund

That is the question I am asking. How does God do that?

Point taken. I see them as joined together. But proceed with the same question regarding 'final cause'. — Paine

My point is that St Thomas used Aristotle's concept of God but added the efficient cause of causing the physical universe to exist. The Prime Mover does not cause physical things to exist.

So that's not motion? How can things get in motion without giving them a start kick? — Haglund

God has legs? What is the kick start?

Rather than present a challenge to this statement, I ask you to provide the basis for it.

The 'formal' cause, by the way, is to say that what one has been made for, is for the sake of fulfilling that possibility to the furthest extent. — Paine

Formal cause just means the shape or form of something. Final cause is the that for the sake of which something happens.