We can't ignore the dynamics of dialectics. All opposites work simultaneously. There is individual freedom, but not so free to be independent of tradition and historical conditions. The same with beauty. It is a harmonious combination of pleasant and painful in highly 'functional' form as Life is by its nature. Boris Shoshensky To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Question for Mando Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 16:20:16 -0800 (PST)
OK, I defer to Saul. Or if Michael pipes up, I defer to him as well. But I still don't believe creativity -- as something to be recognized after the fact --can be said to be a product of "individual freedom" because nobody knows what individual freedom is and it clearly can't be freedom from influence, tradition, the era, or freedom to act in completely novel ways. wc ----- Original Message ---- From: Saul Ostrow <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Sat, November 14, 2009 5:34:26 PM Subject: Re: Question for Mando But bill this is what makes us so different and appealing - and readily ignored except as producers of meaningless things that appeal only to our own subjectivities - what scientist wouldn't want that type of freedom form purpose On 11/14/09 5:39 PM, "William Conger" <[email protected]> wrote: Scientists rarely indulge in such pretensions, and neither do professionals in other fields. -- ____________________________________________________________ Diet Help Cheap Diet Help Tips. Click here. http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2241/c?cp=QDvoUxlO61sdbVUpX3nHLAAAJ1Gc l_zTaptgNR5c8Mer1v9kAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYQAAAAAA=
