Art and truth

What is art? What is beauty?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Art and truth

Post by Skepdick »

Terrapin Station wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 3:44 pm Okay, so what do you find useful about it?
Had you used it, your point would've resonated with me better.
Terrapin Station wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 3:44 pm Again, via typing. That's sufficient for it to obtain.
I am sure it is for you, but I have no idea what you are talking about.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Art and truth

Post by Terrapin Station »

Skepdick wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 3:45 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 3:44 pm Okay, so what do you find useful about it?
Had you used it, your point would've resonated with me better.
I'm asking you what you find useful about an emotion/feeling distinction. It would resonate with you better because of what about the distinction?
Terrapin Station wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 3:44 pm Again, via typing. That's sufficient for it to obtain.
I am sure it is for you, but I have no idea what you are talking about.
What we're typing--words such as the present ones--are something I count as language (it's not the whole of what language is, but it's sufficient to indicate language). So the fact that we're typing these words is sufficient to evidence that language is obtaining.
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Art and truth

Post by Skepdick »

Terrapin Station wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 3:48 pm I'm asking you what you find useful about an emotion/feeling distinction. It would resonate with you better because of what about the distinction?
it resonates better, because you wouldn't be equivocating yourself from the perspective of my (richer) vocabulary.
Terrapin Station wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 3:48 pm What we're typing--words such as the present ones--are something I count as language (it's not the whole of what language is, but it's sufficient to indicate language). So the fact that we're typing these words is sufficient to evidence that language is obtaining.
We seem to have different criteria for sufficiency. Words aren't sufficient for me - machine learning algorithms (such as GPT-3) spit out words.

It's not language, because it lacks intent.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Art and truth

Post by Terrapin Station »

Skepdick wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 3:59 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 3:48 pm I'm asking you what you find useful about an emotion/feeling distinction. It would resonate with you better because of what about the distinction?
it resonates better, because you wouldn't be equivocating yourself from the perspective of my (richer) vocabulary.
That's nothing about the distinction, so it doesn't answer the question. I asked you to specify what about the distinction would make it resonate better with you. That requires explaining an aspect of the distinction that would result in usage of the distinction resonating with you better.
We seem to have different criteria for sufficiency.
Sure.
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Art and truth

Post by Skepdick »

Terrapin Station wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 4:01 pm That's nothing about the distinction, so it doesn't answer the question. I asked you to specify what about the distinction would make it resonate better with you. That requires explaining an aspect of the distinction that would result in usage of the distinction resonating with you better.
Help me help you. What is it that you didn't understand in my previous answer?
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Art and truth

Post by Terrapin Station »

Skepdick wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 4:06 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 4:01 pm That's nothing about the distinction, so it doesn't answer the question. I asked you to specify what about the distinction would make it resonate better with you. That requires explaining an aspect of the distinction that would result in usage of the distinction resonating with you better.
Help me help you. What is it that you didn't understand in my previous answer?
You'd help me by answering what I asked instead of limiting yourself to what you want to allow yourself to say to further an online persona.
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Art and truth

Post by Skepdick »

Terrapin Station wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 4:09 pm You'd help me by answering what I asked instead of limiting yourself to what you want to allow yourself to say to further an online persona.
I answered to the best of my understanding of what you asked.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Art and truth

Post by Terrapin Station »

Skepdick wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 4:09 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 4:09 pm You'd help me by answering what I asked instead of limiting yourself to what you want to allow yourself to say to further an online persona.
I answered to the best of my understanding of what you asked.
Sure, so to be clear: one criterion to answer what I asked is for you to specify something about the feeling/emotion distinction you use.

Do you understand that? (Then we can get to the next criterion.)
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Art and truth

Post by Skepdick »

Terrapin Station wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 4:14 pm Sure, so to be clear: one criterion to answer what I asked is for you to specify something about the feeling/emotion distinction you use.

Do you understand that? (Then we can get to the next criterion.)
Sure. From a historical thread... (because I am too lazy to type).
Skepdick wrote: Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:10 pm The language I use to distinguish between these two is "emotions" and "feelings". Emotions are physiological reactions - you can't control those. They happen in the brain (chemical reactions) outside of your control. You experience them whether you want to or not.

Feelings is the meaning you choose to assign to an emotion in the context of which you are experiencing it.

So for example:

color spectrum + positive emotion (endorphins)-> It feels pretty.
food + positive emotion -> It feels delicious
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Art and truth

Post by Terrapin Station »

Skepdick wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 4:21 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 4:14 pm Sure, so to be clear: one criterion to answer what I asked is for you to specify something about the feeling/emotion distinction you use.

Do you understand that? (Then we can get to the next criterion.)
Sure. From a historical thread... (because I am too lazy to type).
Skepdick wrote: Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:10 pm The language I use to distinguish between these two is "emotions" and "feelings". Emotions are physiological reactions - you can't control those. They happen in the brain (chemical reactions) outside of your control. You experience them whether you want to or not.

Feelings is the meaning you choose to assign to an emotion in the context of which you are experiencing it.

So for example:

color spectrum + positive emotion (endorphins)-> It feels pretty.
food + positive emotion -> It feels delicious
What we'd need to get to is how you'd think this would relate to what I was saying, but before we do that, as is typical with supposed emotion/feeling distinctions, this seems very untenable to me.

For one, this suggests that you have a view that there's a sense of "meaning" that's (a) a feeling, and (b) that isn't a phsyiological/brain reaction that you can't control. Neither side of that makes much sense to me. (Re (b) especially because ALL mental content is physiological/a set of brain states, and "control" of the same is a complicated issue, where we need to be careful that we're not suggesting that whatever control we have isn't itself physiological/a set of brain states.)

What seems most odd to me about it is that you apparently believe that you can control whether something is pretty or delicious to you?
Last edited by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 20, 2021 4:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Art and truth

Post by Skepdick »

Terrapin Station wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 4:29 pm For one, this suggests that you have a view that there's a sense of "meaning" that's (a) a feeling, and (b) that isn't a phsyiological/brain reaction that you can't control. Neither side of that makes much sense to me.
There is the emotion you experience, and there's the way you choose to feel about it.

Whether you view any particular experience in a positive or negative light hinges precisely being able to identify the emotion and "reinterpret" it.

Where some people see failure, other people see learning. Surely this is not new to you? It's at least in Stoicism.
Terrapin Station wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 4:29 pm What seems most odd to me about it is that you apparently believe that you can control whether something is pretty or delicious to you?
You've never heard the phrase "acquired taste"? Dark chocolate tasted horrendous when I first tried it. It is an absolute delicacy to me now.

Had I defaulted to the emotion, without wrangling the feeling I would've had absolutely no reason to try it again.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Art and truth

Post by Terrapin Station »

Skepdick wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 4:35 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 4:29 pm For one, this suggests that you have a view that there's a sense of "meaning" that's (a) a feeling, and (b) that isn't a phsyiological/brain reaction that you can't control. Neither side of that makes much sense to me.
There is the emotion you experience, and there's the way you choose to feel about it.

Whether you view any particular experience in a positive or negative light hinges precisely being able to identify the emotion and "reinterpret" it.

Where some people see failure, other people see learning. Surely this is not new to you? It's at least in Stoicism.
Terrapin Station wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 4:29 pm What seems most odd to me about it is that you apparently believe that you can control whether something is pretty or delicious to you?
You've never heard the phrase "acquired taste"? Dark chocolate tasted horrendous when I first tried it. It is an absolute delicacy to me now.

Had I defaulted to the emotion, without wrangling the feeling I would've had absolutely no reason to try it again.
I don't buy feelings as something that one can choose.

I don't even buy beliefs as something that one can choose. (I'm not sure if you do.)

One can influence feelings and beliefs through experiences, exercises, information acquisition, etc., but that's different than choosing feelings or beliefs, and it typically takes a long time, a lot of work.

This isn't to say that no one would have the experience of choosing feelings or beliefs, but that's not something I can relate to. It's certainly not how my brain works.
Advocate
Posts: 3467
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: Art and truth

Post by Advocate »

[quote="Terrapin Station" post_id=491413 time=1611157159 user_id=12582]
[quote=Skepdick post_id=491410 time=1611156915 user_id=17350]
[quote="Terrapin Station" post_id=491408 time=1611156567 user_id=12582]
For one, this suggests that you have a view that there's a sense of "meaning" that's (a) a feeling, and (b) that [i]isn't[/i] a phsyiological/brain reaction that you can't control. Neither side of that makes much sense to me.
[/quote]
There is the emotion you experience, and there's the way you choose to feel about it.

Whether you view any particular experience in a positive or negative light hinges precisely being able to identify the emotion and "reinterpret" it.

Where some people see failure, other people see learning. Surely this is not new to you? It's at least in Stoicism.

[quote="Terrapin Station" post_id=491408 time=1611156567 user_id=12582]
What seems most odd to me about it is that you apparently believe that you can control whether something is pretty or delicious to you?
[/quote]
You've never heard the phrase "acquired taste"? Dark chocolate tasted horrendous when I first tried it. It is an absolute delicacy to me now.

Had I defaulted to the emotion, without wrangling the feeling I would've had absolutely no reason to try it again.
[/quote]
I don't buy feelings as something that one can [i]choose[/i].

I don't even buy beliefs as something that one can [i]choose[/i]. (I'm not sure if you do.)

One can influence feelings and beliefs through experiences, exercises, information acquisition, etc., but that's different than [i]choosing [/i]feelings or beliefs, and it typically takes a long time, a lot of work.

This isn't to say that no one would have the experience of choosing feelings or beliefs, but that's not something I can relate to. It's certainly not how my brain works.
[/quote]

Feelings arise from your lizard brain. They're not optional. If they're strong enough to gain your active attention, that's when you can "choose" to do something about it, or not. The difference is in the attention and the subsequent application of pre-established priorities, not in the emotions themselves. You can neither choose to have them or not to have them, or what level of caring they contain. Salience is Entirely beyond our control.
Advocate
Posts: 3467
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: Art and truth

Post by Advocate »

[quote=Janoah post_id=467707 time=1598203476 user_id=19679]
They say: "True art!"
But what makes art true, what are the criteria for its truth?
It is clear that neither the photographic accuracy of the image of the object, nor the accurate playing of the notes.
It is possible to paint an object that does not exist in the nature at all, and a robot can play notes in a more accurate way than any musician.

And what makes art to art?
[/quote]

What is meant by "true art" isn't "art that is true" but "that which is truly art."

"What is art?" is one of the reasons aesthetics isn't properly philosophy. The nature of any "what is the nature of?" question is semantic - how do we use the word, nothing more. There are at least two distinct categories of art, the kind you hang in a gallery and the kind you hang on a refrigerator, and the lines are infinitely fuzzy. There are at least two distinct categories of art, the kind that requires serious practice and technical knowledge and the kind that everyone can do, and the lines are infinitely fuzzy. There are at least two distinct categories of art... etc.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8477
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Art and truth

Post by Sculptor »

Art...

I am watching the film ATM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_80s6S_7Vw

The sound of my childhood
Post Reply