I would note my topic line is `inspired 3D worlds`, not `inspiring 3D worlds`. There is a rather vast difference in meaning. ;)
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Julian Leviston <jul...@leviston.net>wrote: > you may find on closer inspection that there can be things that are > intrinsically beautiful, or intrinsically awe-inspiring to humanity as a > whole. > Even an anthropocentric statistical metric will be subject to cultural influence. I do grant that humans are likely to find `great heights` and `big explosions` and `loud music` and other such things awe-inspiring on a very primitive level, but I imagine that cultural exposure to them would suppress the feeling in a statistically measurable way. > it nonetheless matters in a general sense to aspire to such a high > standard of quality in everything > Do keep in mind the fallacy of the beard. There is a significant relationship between quantity and quality, even if it isn't an obvious one. There are also relationships between costs and quality - e.g. flat pay-per-text can completely undermine various story or data distribution models. Given limited resources and limited control over our environment, it does not always make sense to aspire to high standards of quality. > Also, a question that springs to mind is... do you find any of the > popularly "impressive" movies or graphics of the current day awe-inspiring? > Sure. Over at http://hof.povray.org/ I find them quite cool... impressive in a technical sense, but not in a > long-lasting impacting sense... > I do not believe awe-inspiring connotes long-lasting. Ever seen an awe-inspiring thermite fire? judo throw? belch? live theatrical play? Regards, Dave > > On 18/01/2012, at 3:06 PM, David Barbour wrote: > > I understand `awe inspiring` to be subjective - hence, subject to changes > in the observer, such as ephemeral mood or loss of a sensory organ. You > seem to treat it as a heuristic or statistical property - i.e. it's awe > inspiring because people have felt awe in the past and you expect people to > feel awe in the future. > > I suppose I can understand either position. > > But it's silly to say that awe inspiring is just a property of the object > - i.e. you say "without something being awe-inspiring, there's no > possibility for awe to be inspired when the conditions are right." That's > just too egocentric. People find all sorts of funny things awe-inspiring. > Like football. Or grocery bags in the wind. ( > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKg6OJ6zhhc) > > Regards, > > Dave > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 6:35 PM, Julian Leviston <jul...@leviston.net>wrote: > >> No, I find it IS awe-inspiring all of the time. >> >> I may not necessarily be full of awe or actually be inspired at any >> particular one time... however, this doesn't change the fact that certain >> things or people themselves are awe-inspiring all of the time to me. In >> other words, if I'm in a bad mood, this is in itself not necessarily any >> fault, consequence or relationship of or to the fact that Alan Kay is still >> an amazing person. Even in my bad mood, I recognise he is awe-inspiring. >> > >> Guess this depends what you mean by awe-inspiring (as I originally said). >> If you re-read the original context, he was talking about inherent >> breathtaking beauty being required or not. I think to make something >> inherently beautiful or to construct it with detailed thought is actually >> very worthwhile. Without something being awe-inspiring, there's no >> possibility for awe to be inspired when the conditions are right. When >> something is awe inspiring, it doesn't necessarily always follow that awe >> will be inspired, though ;-) >> >> :P >> >> Julian >> >> On 18/01/2012, at 11:34 AM, David Barbour wrote: >> >> You don't find it awe-inspiring "all the time". (If you do, you're >> certainly dysfunctional.) But I readily believe you still find it inspiring >> "some of the time" - and that is enough to be an enriching experience. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> fonc mailing list >> fonc@vpri.org >> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc >> >> > _______________________________________________ > fonc mailing list > fonc@vpri.org > http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc > > > > _______________________________________________ > fonc mailing list > fonc@vpri.org > http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc > >
_______________________________________________ fonc mailing list fonc@vpri.org http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
