Frances momentarily digresses...
The classification of those global objects called the arts and
techs and sciences by some kind of categories is seemingly an
ongoing and unending work in progress for thinkers. There remains
little consensus of opinion on a lot of stuff that has been
posited. The same can be said of aesthetics and of architecture,
and from positions that hold them as either art or tech or
science. It is unclear to me however whether this says something
mainly about the problems of classes or categories or objects or
thinkers or theories. Considering all the learned persons that
exist in scholarly academia, it should be expected that some
reasonable agreement would emerge, even if only tentative. To me
this current state of affairs in regard to a lack of rational
intelligent ability is confusing, to say the least. If
philosophers, let alone artists and technicians and scientists,
cannot deal adequately with psychical things like art and theory,
then it is not surprising that they cannot deal with physical and
practical things like peace and love. This casual observation of
mine may overstate the issue with too much gloom and doom, but it
does seem that philosophy, given its legitimate interests is art
and tech and science, is in some trouble.
