I will, however, point out one consequence of that idea: the most
noticeable difference between abstract art and abstract mathematics is
that abstract mathematics has some aesthetic value. Abstract art can
now consist of a canvas painted one color, or mere splatters of paint
(or other substances) on a surface; contrast that with the Mandelbrot
and Julia sets, or the Hilbert and Peano space-filling curves and von
Koch snowflake, or the elegant complexity which arises from the simple
axioms of group theory. A pure mathematician does his work to satisfy
his curiosity; an abstract artist does his work merely to see what he
can get away with.
An artist is moved by curiosity about the world and himself just
as scientists do in a rational way. The author satisfies this need
through his work. You can find beauty in both a paint and a formal
description of a theory. One can write songs to have a better and
full understanding of what he is feeling and to try to convey his
emotions to others, just like mathematicians convey their knowledge
about the world through axioms, rules, laws, models.
I will also point out that a game does have a function -- to be fun.
Define in an objective way: to be fun. :P
It is not a tool like hammers, "cat" command or applied maths.
I'm thinking about applied coding, pure coding, and applied pure coding.
Sounds almost like Kant xD
I like Mozart and Minimalism just as much as I like Dadaism or free
Jazz, even if they have different forms and subjective functions.
I hope you aren't suggesting that Mozart *is* minimalist.
It was an example of "elegance", to pinpoint the delta with Dadaism.
Robert Ransom
--
Wyrmskull
