This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Moderator: Only_Humean

Forum rules
Forum Philosophy


Postby superstrongsteve » Tue Dec 10, 2002 6:06 am

I was wondering...What makes art great and what makes a great artist great?
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2002 12:32 am

Postby thales » Mon Dec 16, 2002 6:35 pm

the all seeing eye and associated meanings inherent within the communicative matrix of human language...'great' is a word not dis-simila to 'greet'....

'when did the future stop being a promise, and start being a threat'
Posts: 72
Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2002 1:00 am

Postby bda » Tue Dec 17, 2002 1:14 am

read some Hume on the subject.
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Oct 22, 2002 5:52 pm

Postby thales » Tue Dec 17, 2002 3:44 pm

i have done...and the quotes are to provoke the intelligent response of others, i have made my own already...

Posts: 72
Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2002 1:00 am

Postby Johan » Sat Dec 21, 2002 12:25 am

I do not agree with Hume when he base art judgements (and also morality) on subjective taste. Here are my two defenitions of art. 1. the interim art defenition, and 2. the defenition of estheticism.

1. I judge good art from it's ability to transform a person or a collective. Art have no value in it self, it can only be valued from the effect that takes place between the observer and the object and finally the outcome of the transformation process and the subjects or the collective subjective new standpoint in relation to it's surrounding. What makes art great is the potential level it have to do this. Art can both be individual and collective theraphy; here you find a good portion of the modern art. It does not nessesary have to show an estetic (objective) face to be useful in this process.

2. Art is estetic if it harmonize with the nature. As long as we actually call it art it copies the nature or are "illustrations of nature". When art becomes true estetic it stops beeing art and it will be integrated with the process we call life, (Note: a bird does not have to categorize his singing as art). A culture also have the ability to go bad, and in that case all art that was once good and formed this culture will be seen in a new perspective. A culture is always judged by the level of integraton with the nature.

Art is temporary; and it's always transformed into and taken over by it's (estetic) function. Art can easily become an abusive substitute for diminished lifefunctions if it's purpose is not in relation to this process.

User avatar
Posts: 109
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 10:07 pm
Location: Sweden

Return to Philosophy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot]