I think that any expression that comes from the soul has a human value
that may be unique and worthy of some reflection. Only Humans do that.
mando
On Mar 3, 2009, at 9:49 AM, Chris Miller wrote:
It looks like I got it completely wrong -- and it's believers like
myself who
dominate this list, with skeptics like Cheerskep and Mando serving
as a very
vocal minority.
But beyond that simple statement of belief (and William's extended
exposition
of it) I doubt that our beliefs have much else in common.
Unlike Brady, I do not believe that "the crucial, the necessary and
sufficient, property of an "artwork" is the truth-conditions to
which it is
subjected.". I don't care whether something has been offered to us
as a
documentation or not, unless I need it to be accurate about some
detail (like
the location of streets on a map)
Unlike Francis, I do not believe that good art "must presuppose
some semiotic
value". I believe that good art exists as distinct, rare, almost
miraculous
phenomena that presupposes nothing that's capable of being understood.
Unlike Boris, I do not believe that "the best of art is ....
lifting the level
of sophistication of human as biological and spiritual system.".
Maybe that's
true -- but I just haven't seen any evidence for it. Despite all
the good art
I think I've seen, my own biological system has been slowly, but
relentlessly,
deteriorating -- and only God knows what my spiritual system has
been up to.
Unlike William -- well, actually -- I can't find any of his beliefs
on this
thread which i would not share -- except for his ongoing belief
that brain
science will eventually say something non-trivial about good art.
____________________________________________________________
Click to learn about options trading and get the latest information.
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/
BLSrjnxUZ1l8u7yGhy6ZWsGCaITybu
dhzsxUvy5ykBhFvli3FlUAs0T0AIA/
