Two issues I wish to mention, here.
Firstly, I present a few rapid-fire ideas about objective morality,
culminating in an integration of aesthetics, intelligence, and
morality, all in a few brief sentences ;)
Secondly, I give a mention to computer scientist Randy Pausch, who
recently died.
As
But what is aesthetics the study of? Of beauty? That's it isn't it?
But how can something as plastic as beauty have any kind of terminal
value that you and I can both share? Do aesthetic terminal values
decide where something fits into aesthetic reality or something like
that? By the
2008/7/29 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Point (1) there is a clear evolution to the universe. It started from
a low-entropy-density state, and is moving towards a higher-entropy
density, which, remarkably, just happens to coincide with an increase
in physical complexity with time. In the beginning the
Marc,
I would agree with you that aesthetics is an important driving
principle, and the top scientist _do_ recognize this (see for instance
many quotes by Albert Einstein in this direction).
Also, you should have a look at Nietzsche - science and the aesthetic
pervade his work!
Cheers,
Marc,
your (long) post gave me a feeling of having returned into my childhood.
Back to the reductionist figments of the model view 'physical world' and
'conventional sciences'.
I should interjet a lot into your long text, in view of a 'totality-view'
(not yet adaquately formulated) - I choose to
5 matches
Mail list logo
