- This topic has 9 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by
schi.
-
AuthorPosts
-
12/05/2017 at 14:07 #17943
Another ontological abd metaphysical subject is that pertaining to aesthetics – a very important aspect of philosophy that tries to establish what is beauty, the beautiful, the role of art in our lives and how we can be inspired and inspire others through beauty and live our life experiencing beauty, to be beautiful and to appreciate beauty.
12/05/2017 at 15:42 #19376Beauty is one’s own philosophical interpretation of what they see, some people can’t see beauty in anything but others see beauty in everything. What one sees as beautiful another may see as ugly, And you have those who may look beautiful on the outside but are really ugly on the inside and vise-versa. Thow there may be social norms for what is beautiful it’s still are own interpretation of beauty that provales in the end .
BY FOR NOW
12/05/2017 at 16:36 #19368Great first go at it @”DAWN” !
In philosophy jargon, what you just said here means that beauty is relative, in the eyes of the beholder so to speak. This means there is no thing-in-itself which is beautiful absolutely.
I see the living of life as a work of art and that if one embraces the artistic life, that is beautiful.
12/05/2017 at 18:22 #19375I believe that relativity in matters or subjectivity assumes (as is perfectly common and normal) that there are neutral shared objects that people are all dealing with. I don’t see that to ever really be the case. I think everyone is dealing with unique objects which are only treated as shared, and that those interpretations or reactions they have to those unique and personal objects are precise and part of them. Meaning the Eel slurping you like is not the same as the Eel slurping you don’t like, and there is no Eel Slurping by itself, there are only the ones which are uniquely yours and never shared or experienced by anyone else. There is a subtle difference between this and subjectivity as it is normally understood which people would likely take for granted though its actually quite a big deal what each ultimately implies.
16/05/2017 at 03:51 #19377
Great first go at it @”DAWN” !In philosophy jargon, what you just said here means that beauty is relative, in the eyes of the beholder so to speak. This means there is no thing-in-itself which is beautiful absolutely.
I see the living of life as a work of art and that if one embraces the artistic life, that is beautiful.
Ya that is what i meant @”Ontical” , Ya it is.
BY FOR NOW
16/05/2017 at 04:32 #19370Thank you for visiting! Hope you find the time to say more soon!
19/05/2017 at 08:10 #19369I think politics are inescapable when talking about ‘what is truthful and beautiful’. Our conceptions of truth inform our conceptions of beauty and vice versa.
For example, a flashy, glamourised, wealthy look is to me, the symbolic form of a full on immersion into capitalism and so I see that look as monstrous – but the same can be said for how they will see my look, something more earthy, plain and simple.
The question arises, how can we use aesthetics to influence politics?
19/05/2017 at 09:38 #19388
I think politics are inescapable when talking about ‘what is truthful and beautiful’. Our conceptions of truth inform our conceptions of beauty and vice versa.For example, a flashy, glamourised, wealthy look is to me, the symbolic form of a full on immersion into capitalism and so I see that look as monstrous – but the same can be said for how they will see my look, something more earthy, plain and simple.
The question arises, how can we use aesthetics to influence politics?
Need thou use aesthetics to influence politics? To me aesthetics shouldn’t be in the same sentence as politics as is derives from what is important. Nonetheless I think beauty lies in the eye of the beholder as each person as their own interpretation of such a concept.
I just wanted to concur that when looking at someone who has material linens that are worth more than my car, I too see them as immersed in the system.
19/05/2017 at 09:48 #19371I hesitate to buy special sheets because the bugs here called silverfish eat through and make holes. Aesthetics and Politics are often very much the same thing or flow together and work together. I don’t object to certain looks being used as tools to manipulate people simply by suggestion and symbols which are associated with ideas. How you look, really does count if you want to influence people (Politics being human manipulation).
19/05/2017 at 10:10 #19374@”schi” propaganda art has always been influential in politics. Nietzsche’s slave morality, the perspective of the weak who see success as evil, is another example of a political starying point from aesthetics. Da-da is another example of art portraying the abject, nihilism and post-modernism, which is all a reflection on politics through art.
While aesthetics and politics are different, they can be interdisciplinary- Nietzsche and The Birth of Tragedy is another great example of the influence of aesthetics in a political and social context.
Marina Abramovic’s work is all politics- she brings hard issues close to home and merges the observer with situations.
Advertising is all about aesthetics and politics!
[hr]
‘The Inhuman: Life beyond Death’ in Rosi Braidotti’s ‘The Post Human’ is worth a read here.
[hr]
https://ontic-philosophy.com/Thread-Rosi-Braidotti-The-Post-Human-Polity -
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
