Consciousness in the Aesthetic Imagination
metapsychosis.com
Consciousness in the Aesthetic Imagination
1–10 of 14 posts
Re: Consciousness in the Aesthetic Imagination
#2I always enjoy following people's journeys through particular artworks, and on that level I greatly enjoyed this article.
On the level of philosophy of art I found that its starting premise (art's non-discursiveness) is undermined by the analyses of the paintings it uses as illustrations, not least by its final deconstruction of a Vemeer.
Re: Consciousness in the Aesthetic Imagination
#3> If after the death of the last living thing on earth, there remained a radio playing the Adagio over and over again among the ashes of civilization, there would still be sadness in the world.
That is a very strong claim I would love to see substantiated. What is an emotion (like sadness) without an animal capable of experiencing that emotion? Does the author claim that emotions like sadness are metaphysical, or at least, transcend human physiology?
What if we discovered an animal or alien species incapable of experiencing "sadness" as we do? The quoted statement seems to preclude this as a possibility, which is a very strong assumption.
> Aesthetic vision apprehends the universe as an immanent field of living forces. All of reality is ensouled, willful, alive. Small wonder, then, that works of art present the world as innately sentient.
Alive? Innately sentient? Citation needed.
This article is filled with emotionally flamboyant language that yields either extremely strong and testable claims, or useless drivel.
Re: Consciousness in the Aesthetic Imagination
#4> If after the death of the last living thing on earth, there remained a radio playing the Adagio over and over again among the ashes of civilization, there would still be sadness in the world. That is a very strong claim I would love to see substantiated. What is an emotion (like sadness) without an animal capable of experiencing that emotion? Does the author claim that emotions like sadness are metaphysical, or at…
> Does the author claim that emotions like sadness are metaphysical, or at least, transcend human physiology?
It is not a claim on the nature of emotions, but rather a claim about the nature of existence itself. In other words, he's speaking figuratively, not literally.
Re: Consciousness in the Aesthetic Imagination
#5If you like this kind of discourse, check out what the medieval Indians have to say about aesthetics from the View of non-dual Shaiva Tantra, and the concept of "rasa" (aesthetic sentiment).
A good book to start with this is Tantra Illuminated, by Christopher Wallis. It only spends a short bit explaining rasa from the tantric perspective, but it very much comes from a similar stream of ideas as, "Aesthetic vision apprehends the universe as an immanent field of living forces. All of reality is ensouled, willful, alive. Small wonder, then, that works of art present the world as innately sentient."
Re: Consciousness in the Aesthetic Imagination
#6> If after the death of the last living thing on earth, there remained a radio playing the Adagio over and over again among the ashes of civilization, there would still be sadness in the world. That is a very strong claim I would love to see substantiated. What is an emotion (like sadness) without an animal capable of experiencing that emotion? Does the author claim that emotions like sadness are metaphysical, or at…
> Does the author claim that emotions like sadness are metaphysical, or at least, transcend human physiology? It is not a claim on the nature of emotions, but rather a claim about the nature of existence itself. In other words, he's speaking figuratively, not literally.
Don't be so sure about speaking figuratively. This particular author might be, however, there are profound philosophies that do not.
Re: Consciousness in the Aesthetic Imagination
#7> If after the death of the last living thing on earth, there remained a radio playing the Adagio over and over again among the ashes of civilization, there would still be sadness in the world. That is a very strong claim I would love to see substantiated. What is an emotion (like sadness) without an animal capable of experiencing that emotion? Does the author claim that emotions like sadness are metaphysical, or at…
> Does the author claim that emotions like sadness are metaphysical, or at least, transcend human physiology? It is not a claim on the nature of emotions, but rather a claim about the nature of existence itself. In other words, he's speaking figuratively, not literally.
[deleted]
Re: Consciousness in the Aesthetic Imagination
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Does the author claim that emotions like sadness are metaphysical, or at least, transcend human physiology? It is not a claim on the nature of emotions, but rather a claim about the nature of existence itself. In other words, he's speaking figuratively, not literally.
Don't be so sure about speaking figuratively. This particular author might be, however, there are profound philosophies that do not.
For example, "all of us" are literally the same entity viewing itself using a variety of perceptions.
Re: Consciousness in the Aesthetic Imagination
#9> If after the death of the last living thing on earth, there remained a radio playing the Adagio over and over again among the ashes of civilization, there would still be sadness in the world. That is a very strong claim I would love to see substantiated. What is an emotion (like sadness) without an animal capable of experiencing that emotion? Does the author claim that emotions like sadness are metaphysical, or at…
>What if we discovered an animal or alien species incapable of experiencing "sadness" as we do? The quoted statement seems to preclude this as a possibility, which is a very strong assumption.
Transcendence of feelings does not imply universality. The fact that a rock cannot (potentially?) feel sadness does not take away something from sadness. Not that I necessarily agree with the authors point of view, but our feelings could be conduits of pure feelings (as a conditional consumption) and at the same time pure feelings can be reifications of felt experiences (production.)
>Citation needed
So if I wrote the same thing citing OP would you be happy? I think what you are looking is for a citation of proof. On the other hand, do you have any citation/proof to substantiate your disbelief of the statements? I do not think we need a proof for every statement we make. After all, we are more than proof machines, and exploration of the unknown is what leads us to more discoveries. I read this as an opinion/philosophical piece and found it enjoyable in the questions it raises, such as those you focus on.
Re: Consciousness in the Aesthetic Imagination
#10> If after the death of the last living thing on earth, there remained a radio playing the Adagio over and over again among the ashes of civilization, there would still be sadness in the world. That is a very strong claim I would love to see substantiated. What is an emotion (like sadness) without an animal capable of experiencing that emotion? Does the author claim that emotions like sadness are metaphysical, or at…
[deleted]