With formal models and codified methods we can design and evaluate for a phenomenon we aren't sure can be adequately captured.
The above restates the question Berg qoutes (another damned qoute out of context) as an assertion. Does it make sense? The issue here is a classic if-then proposition but not one that can be logically proved. If the model and methods are right then the phenomenon can be recognized even if it can't be captured. This is at the crux of speculative science, such as string theory. String theory explains physical phenomena that can't be proved to exist or which remain 'inadequately captured'. String theory could be wrong even though it constitutes a model for designing a hypothetical universe that seems to uncover more options for physics than other, proved models. A scientific model may capture something in nature that otherwise remains unmeasured. I think something like this is also applies in art-making. I make a painting and it may evoke what I did not intend or what I did not seek. Equally, I could make a painting, a model, that does seem to capture what I suspected I sought. Either way, it's all experimental, in the lab or on the canvas. The statement does not move us to any solid position. It merely says, if you create a model it might be worth it in some way. That's not much different than saying, If you breathe then you might continue to live well. Berg is upset that there seems to be no clear standard for quality in art. How sad. There's no standard that can assure anything. Regarding outcomes, or models, there's no guarantee that anything yet unproved can be proved. wc ----- Original Message ---- From: joseph berg <[email protected]> To: aesthetics-l <[email protected]> Sent: Thu, September 6, 2012 12:21:44 AM Subject: "But without formal models and codified methods, how can we design and evaluate for a phenomenon we aren't sure can be adequately captured?" "But without formal models and codified methods, how can we design and evaluate for a phenomenon we aren't sure can be adequately captured?"<http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1453155%20%22But%20without%20for mal%20models%20and%20codified%20methods,%20how%20can%20we%20design%20and%20ev aluate%20for%20a%20phenomenon%20we%20aren't%20sure%20can%20be%20adequately%20 captured?%22> http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1453155<http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1 453155%20%22But%20without%20formal%20models%20and%20codified%20methods,%20how %20can%20we%20design%20and%20evaluate%20for%20a%20phenomenon%20we%20aren't%20 sure%20can%20be%20adequately%20captured?%22>
