Joseph asked: Aesthetic Ideal do you have one?
Chris -- Your position seems to be that you are against asking him what he has in mind with 'Aesthetic Ideal'. "No Cheerskep, there really isn't an assumption that I know precisely what the other is talking about. I start with a rough idea and proceed through iteration, fully knowing I might well be wrong. And I do operate usually on the basis that the other may, or may not, be using a similar approach." But, Chris, in your first response to Joseph's query you said: " I would say I don't have an aesthetic ideal per se; I do have a large collection of exemplars that I consider worth learning from (mostly humanist artists of various periods) and a fairly strong sense of what I reject as just not being worth the bother" I hope you can understand why in that response, when you use "iteration" in the sense of repeating his phrase, you seemed to me to be assuming with some surety that the notion Joseph had in mind was that of "exemplars" that is "aesthetic ideals" in the sense of ideal specific works (of art). But Joseph could have as easily had in mind "a maxim, rule or goal that guides me, the creator, as I work." Or, "a maxim or rule to guide me, as a contemplator, when I confront an alleged work of art". Again, why "start with a rough idea"? Why not just ask the guy. "Look, I can immediately think of three different possible notions behind the use of the term 'Aesthetic ideal' which one (or some other) are you talking about? I have to believe that if I were to ask you, "Do you ever use a foopgoom?" you'd respond with "What do you mean by 'foopgoom'?" That's because my use of "foopgoom" would trigger no memory whatever in your head. In contrast, "aesthetic ideal" triggers memory in such a way that at least three possible notions could be in the user's mind. I'm sorry that my approach -- when confronted with numerous possible notions behind a speaker's phrase, ask him what's on his mind - I am merely "sitting on the sidelines complaining about a lack of precision". I do this only because I don't agreed that "one usually learns a lot more and arrives at a better result more efficiently" by starting out assuming a single notion behind an ambiguous phrase. I claim the last week of shots-in-the-dark postings on this forum are evidence that it was a mistake not to ask Joseph at the outset to clarify what he was asking about.
