This is getting a bit ancient now but I realise I didn't reply to an earlier
email from Cheerskep which said in part: "I honestly believe no one of
competence could fail to grasp what I was after when I asked for "locutions
that can be used with no loss in conveying the
notion one is entertaining, and with the benefit of reducing confusion". I
didn't go on at length about the sort of thing I was recommending because I
thought I'd made it amply clear in discussing replacements for 'real' and
'reality'....And yet you did not address that central thrust of my posting,
and my request for "Any thoughts?" Believe it: I'm not at this moment making
a whine of amour propre: "Jeez, you didn't address my precious ruminations!"
I'm truly trying to figure out how your mind let's you do that."
This was about my half joking proposal to ban the words aesthetic, beauty
and ugly.
Cheerskep is assuming, I think, that I want to propose working substitutes
or replacements for these words. I don't. I just want them ignored for say
about 10 years. I want people to forget they ever existed. Then see how they
go talking about art and the theory of art without them. I think they would
get on just fine. Moreover I think the standard of discussion would go up
noticeably. The ban on the word beauty should reduce the number of entirely
useless lyrical outpourings on the subject. And the ban on aesthetic should
stop the short-circuiting of thought processes that the word so often
causes. ('What do I think is the reason for this? Oh yes, must be that
aesthetic thing. I'll call it aesthetic.')
DA
