On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 12:09 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > I certainly could benefit from a lot more clarification, but this thought > persists in my head: The fact that Van Gogh's and Godel's work primarily > went > on in their heads, in their brains, would not justify me in saying > therefore they must both be the product of something called "intellect" > and thus > they must both be "the same" in any useful way. I still suspect it's more > useful for us as aestheticians to look into the differences. > > When I see the word 'intellect', the notion that arises in my mind has much > in common with my "high intelligence" notion, but the two notions tend not > to be identical. Very roughly I may be able to convey it this way: My > 'intellect' notion varies somewhat with the context, but the core of it is > something like "the ability to think", while 'high intelligence' stirs > "ability to > think at a high level across a broad range range". I admit the distinction > feels fuzzy, (but all notion is fuzzy to an extent), however it has its > serviceability. > > But I also feel the brain produces elements of consciousness that don't > feel like the exclusive product of intellect...
Isn't the following at least part of the reason why artists feel compelled to create?: - Everything in the unconscious seeks outward manifestation, and the personality too desires to evolve out of its unconscious conditions and to experience itself as a whole. Carl Gustav Jung
