Page 3 of 5

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Sat Sep 23, 2017 6:20 pm
by Arcturus Descending
Do you think that a thought can be illustrated?

Another.

cigarette smoking can cause death.jpg
cigarette smoking can cause death.jpg (9.64 KiB) Viewed 870 times



enlightenment.jpg
enlightenment.jpg (5.83 KiB) Viewed 870 times



ecstatic.jpg
ecstatic.jpg (4.98 KiB) Viewed 870 times


They do it in advertising all of the time.


All you need is to be able to understand a word or phrase by personal experience and it comes into existence.

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 12:01 am
by Alf
All your examples don't and can't show what I've meant. I've meant whether a thought can be illustrated in the way that all humans would do it each time in the same way (your example "thought", for example, does not show this, because it can be interpreted in many, many other ways and from time to time very differently) and whether a picture can be thought by all humans each time in the same way (for example: a planet as a picture and Saturn as the thought always in the same way by all humans, but that is not the case either). What I mean is that we have the subject/object problem here again.

What do you, for example, think when you see my avatar?
Image
How would you, for example, illustrate this thought?

:lol:

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 12:02 am
by Arminius
Alf wrote:What do you, for example, think when you see my avatar?
How would you, for example, illustrate this thought?

If I may answer:

I think of Alf and would illustrate that thought as follows:
                    Image
:)

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 10:59 pm
by Alf
Arminius wrote:
Alf wrote:What do you, for example, think when you see my avatar?
How would you, for example, illustrate this thought?

If I may answer:

I think of Alf and would illustrate that thought as follows:
                    Image
:)

But that’s not what everyone thinks and would illustrate.

I, for example, think of my birth place when I see my avatar and my illustration of this thought would be the birth house, and that is not illustrated in my avatar.

My avatar shows pretty clearly the church and pretty dimly a few houses of the village where I was born, but not my birth house.

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:34 pm
by Arcturus Descending
Alf,


What do you, for example, think when you see my avatar?
How would you, for example, illustrate this thought?


Of course, I may be wrong here but when I see your avatar, aside from what you revealed of it, I think of someone who likes or loves his solitude, likes to enmesh himself in mystery, likes deeper shades and shadows rather then bright sunlight, enjoys a place much less traveled by people, likes to reflect on his life, someone who likes to get up in the early morning before the world gets up and someone who likes to stay up late at night when others have already gone to sleep. Someone who is content and at peace with himself when he has a sense of being all alone in this world.

There is a kind of sacred essence which I glean from the avatar.
Now you can laugh but that is what I sense from the avatar.

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 10:58 pm
by Arminius
Alf wrote:
Arminius wrote:
Alf wrote:What do you, for example, think when you see my avatar?
How would you, for example, illustrate this thought?

If I may answer:

I think of Alf and would illustrate that thought as follows:
                    Image
:)

But that’s not what everyone thinks and would illustrate.

I, for example, think of my birth place when I see my avatar and my illustration of this thought would be the birth house, and that is not illustrated in my avatar.

My avatar shows pretty clearly the church and pretty dimly a few houses of the village where I was born, but not my birth house.

Because you wrote the following text too:

Alf wrote:Food for thought or for illustration.

Do you think that a picture can be thought?
Do you think that a thought can be illustrated?


Is it right that you are saying that there are many differences when it comes to thinking a picture and imaging a thought?

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 5:06 pm
by MagsJ
Arminius wrote:The similarities between philosophy and art are not caused by an accident.

What do you think about the similarities, the analogies?

The two are inextricably linked.

From Art and Design, and Poetry and Writing et al, comes Philosophy. We think first, then we feel/express after.

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 10:39 pm
by Alf
Arcturus Descending wrote:Alf,


What do you, for example, think when you see my avatar?
How would you, for example, illustrate this thought?


Of course, I may be wrong here but when I see your avatar, aside from what you revealed of it, I think of someone who likes or loves his solitude, likes to enmesh himself in mystery, likes deeper shades and shadows rather then bright sunlight, enjoys a place much less traveled by people, likes to reflect on his life, someone who likes to get up in the early morning before the world gets up and someone who likes to stay up late at night when others have already gone to sleep. Someone who is content and at peace with himself when he has a sense of being all alone in this world.

There is a kind of sacred essence which I glean from the avatar.
Now you can laugh but that is what I sense from the avatar.

No, I don't laugh, but I don't like shades and shadows more than bright sunlight.

Arminius wrote:
Alf wrote:What do you, for example, think when you see my avatar?
How would you, for example, illustrate this thought?

If I may answer:

I think of Alf and would illustrate that thought as follows:
                    Image
:)
Arminius wrote:
Alf wrote:But that’s not what everyone thinks and would illustrate.

I, for example, think of my birth place when I see my avatar and my illustration of this thought would be the birth house, and that is not illustrated in my avatar.

My avatar shows pretty clearly the church and pretty dimly a few houses of the village where I was born, but not my birth house.

Because you wrote the following text too:

Alf wrote:Food for thought or for illustration.

Do you think that a picture can be thought?
Do you think that a thought can be illustrated?


Is it right that you are saying that there are many differences when it comes to thinking a picture and imaging a thought?

Yes. That's right.

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 11:17 pm
by Arminius
MagsJ wrote:
Arminius wrote:The similarities between philosophy and art are not caused by an accident.

What do you think about the similarities, the analogies?

The two are inextricably linked.

From Art and Design, and Poetry and Writing et al, comes Philosophy. We think first, then we feel/express after.

Are you sure? I mean: Do you always think before you feel? :P

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:33 am
by MagsJ
Arminius wrote:
MagsJ wrote:
Arminius wrote:The similarities between philosophy and art are not caused by an accident.

What do you think about the similarities, the analogies?
The two are inextricably linked.

From Art and Design, and Poetry and Writing et al, comes Philosophy. We think first, then we feel/express after.

Are you sure? I mean: Do you always think before you feel? :P

I see you made a funny there...

Even if one was acting on instinct, any actions would still be triggered by a subconscious thought.

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2017 2:07 pm
by Arminius
MagsJ wrote:Even if one was acting on instinct, any actions would still be triggered by a subconscious thought.

What is a "subconscious thought" (according to you)?

Image

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 7:24 am
by MagsJ
Arminius wrote:
MagsJ wrote:Even if one was acting on instinct, any actions would still be triggered by a subconscious thought.

What is a "subconscious thought" (according to you)?

Image

..something that sets parameters for us to operate in, and instinct would come under those innate parameters.

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2017 1:15 am
by Arminius
Does a thought not always be a conscious one (according to you)?

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Mon Oct 30, 2017 7:43 pm
by Alf
Ur-thoughts are conscious too. All thoughts are conscious. Even if they are in contact with instincts: Thoughts are always conscious.

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Mon Oct 30, 2017 11:58 pm
by Arminius
Yes.

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 2:16 am
by James S Saint
Alf wrote:Thoughts are always conscious.

In a different sense, unrelated to art, a great deal of thinking and the associated "thoughts" are not conscious (unless you are defining thoughts as only the conscious thoughts). A great deal of cognition is subconscious deducing, predicting, and presuming and often very complex thoughts, difficult to express in spoken language.

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 7:08 am
by Magnus Anderson
Arminius wrote:Does a thought not always be a conscious one (according to you)?


Being conscious of your thoughts can mean many different things but in most cases what people mean when they speak of conscious thoughts is words i.e. thoughts expressed in language.

Thoughts express themselves through actions -- all kind of actions. They express themselves through verbal actions but they also express themselves through non-verbal actions. In fact, their expression through non-verbal actions, I will argue, is their most significant form of expression.

Being conscious or unconscious of something simply means being aware or unaware of that something. And if that something refers to your thoughts then what it means is being aware or unaware of your thoughts. Your thoughts manifest through your actions and you can be aware or unaware of your actions, and if you are aware of them, you can be aware or unware of what kind of thoughts direct them.

I performed who-knows-how-many actions in the past. Some of these actions I was aware of and I am still aware of. Some of these actions I was aware of but I am no longer aware of (I forgot them.) And some of these actions I was never aware of. Of those actions I am still aware of some of them are processed by my brain which means I have an insight into what kind of thoughts directed them.

The purpose of thinking is prediction.
The purpose of prediction is to prevent what is unwanted from happening.

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 3:53 pm
by Arminius
I define "thoughts" as "concsious thoughts". So to me, "unsonscious thoughts" don't exist at all, and something like "subconscious thoughts" should not be called "thoughts" or just "subconscious thoughts" or "preconscious thoughts".

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 5:13 pm
by Magnus Anderson
I understand. Would you agree that "conscious thought" is nothing other than "imaginary speech"? Personally, I think that in a lot of situations these "conscious thoughts" hinder thinking. We talk in order to communicate. When there is no reason to communicate, there is no reason to be "conscious of your thoughts". Because, when you're "conscious of your thoughts", what you are really doing is you are imagining yourself sharing your inclinations with others. And when there is no reason to do so, it's a waste of energy. The goal does not require it. We do it merely because we are used to doing it. Because we are used to talking. We don't do it because it is necessary. Imagine yourself in the wild having these "conscious thoughts" before deciding how to go about hunting your prey. It's excessive. It does not help you in any way. It's pointless because there is noone to listen to you. The more efficient approach would be to keep your mind silent. By forcing it to stop talking you force it to focus its attention on what matters. In fact, you force it to think more and to act only when it is necessary to act. But then, it appears that according to you, such a person, relying mostly on his intuition to make decisions, does not think. Apparently, because his thinking process is opaque. He is not aware how he thinks, so he must not be thinking.

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 6:02 pm
by Jakob
A strategist never shares his most conscious thoughts.
A philosopher must he a strategist.

This site shows why.

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 6:07 pm
by James S Saint
So if not thoughts and thinking, when you are on autopilot driving through typical city traffic while your mind drifts away onto distant day-dreams, what do you want to call that calculating, predicting, strategizing, and so on??

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 6:12 pm
by WendyDarling
JSS,
Didn't we have a discussion about this autopilot mode years ago? I can't recall the thread.

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 6:30 pm
by James S Saint
WendyDarling wrote:JSS,
Didn't we have a discussion about this autopilot mode years ago? I can't recall the thread.

Possibly. I can't remember the discussion.

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 9:50 pm
by Alf
James S Saint wrote:
Alf wrote:Thoughts are always conscious.

In a different sense, unrelated to art, a great deal of thinking and the associated "thoughts" are not conscious (unless you are defining thoughts as only the conscious thoughts). A great deal of cognition is subconscious deducing, predicting, and presuming and often very complex thoughts, difficult to express in spoken language.

But the spoken language can and does express those very complex thoughts.

James S Saint wrote:So if not thoughts and thinking, when you are on autopilot driving through typical city traffic while your mind drifts away onto distant day-dreams, what do you want to call that calculating, predicting, strategizing, and so on??

Those so-called "strategists" are liars and fakers; so by "strategizing" they just mean "lying" and "faking".

Re: Philosophy and Art

PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 11:26 pm
by Arminius
Magnus Anderson wrote:I understand. Would you agree that "conscious thought" is nothing other than "imaginary speech"? Personally, I think that in a lot of situations these "conscious thoughts" hinder thinking. We talk in order to communicate.

We do not only talk in order to communicate, but also in order to e.g. get power ... and so on. So, communication can also be something like a lie, a fake, a mask, an excuse ... and so on and so forth.