Random Thoughts

[romantisaurusrex]

http://www.match-cut.org/showpost.ph...ostcount=19596

I don't think it assumes good and bad media (good and bad descriptors in art and morality are too extreme and lead to problems... some of which the analytic philosophers ran up against). I think what it assumes is that there are better and worse artistic creations (a matter of degree), judged as such via the level of thought, effort and insight that went into their creation.

There's no difference between good/bad and better/worse. Better is more good and worse is more bad. Better/worse just sounds less presumtuous or elitist or whatever. As far as thought, effort, and insight, you can have plenty of the first two and still create what you or I might deem bad or cheap media, and as for the latter quality (insight), even if such a thing DOES exist, no one person is able to judge the level of it in any one particular work of art or media. The fact is that the Jersey Shore probably does contain a good amount of insight into our culture.

[romantisaurusrex]

Grandma has weeks to live. Kidneys failing. Supposed to be a peaceful way to die. Just booked a ticket home for this weekend. Cried most of it out of my system for now. She's ninety years old. Life is stupid. I don't want her to go.

Really sorry.

[romantisaurusrex]

I'm not following you here. The alternative is to encourage people to favor more nuanced art thereby generating a culture where quality art gets funded and appreciated (ex: I would say that certain other countries and cultures have nationwide filmmaking communities that are more interested in formally robust and thoughtful cinema).

On another note, the creation of quality art is not the only reason to encourage people not to read Twilight or watch Jersey Shore, etc. Reading/watching/experiencing great works of art has a transformative experience on individuals. Art appreciation is as valuable (if not more so in my eyes) than a lot of other forms of education that we teach our children. Can we all agree that education as a general concept is a valuable one?

Of course I'm not saying that everyone should have Andrei Rublev as their favorite film. People should like what they like and pursue genre cinema, etc but there are gradations even in genre cinema. So in relation to that, it's less about watching/not watching certain media than individuals making claims without the knowledge to back up such claims. For instance proclaiming Troll 2 to be the greatest horror film of all time precisely because it's the only horror film you've ever seen.

Triple post. Education is valuable in the sense that in order to make a media-vote (from purchasing a song to making value-claims about a film) that means anything you must be educated as to alternatives, and the more influences you have absorbed the more your media-vote means. However, if someone has seen every horror film created and still claims Troll 2 to be the greatest, there is no debunking the claim, meaning that it is perhaps actually truth.

[Qrazy]

There's no difference between good/bad and better/worse. Better is more good and worse is more bad. Better/worse just sounds less presumtuous or elitist or whatever.

Yes there is. Good/bad is binary, better/worse exists along a continuum. It's one of the key distinctions of the analytic movement which allowed them to make some philosophical progress with their particular project. Any given act isn't morally good or bad, it is better or worse than another act. To say it is always wrong to lie for instance creates major problems when making ethical decisions. I believe this distinction can be usefully extended to appraising art and aesthetics. I like to conceptually think of artistic quality as electron spheres of probability.

As far as thought, effort, and insight, you can have plenty of the first two and still create what you or I might deem bad or cheap media, and as for the latter quality (insight), even if such a thing DOES exist, no one person is able to judge the level of it in any one particular work of art or media. The fact is that the Jersey Shore probably does contain a good amount of insight into our culture.

Did you click on the post I linked? No one person has to be the arbiter of quality in art for there to be relative quality in art.

[Qrazy]

Triple post. Education is valuable in the sense that in order to make a media-vote (from purchasing a song to making value-claims about a film) that means anything you must be educated as to alternatives, and the more influences you have absorbed the more your media-vote means. However, if someone has seen every horror film created and still claims Troll 2 to be the greatest, there is no debunking the claim, meaning that it is perhaps actually truth.

No, because pure intake isn't enough to lead to nuanced taste. Awareness and reflection are key components. Someone can have seen 3,000 films and another person 500 and the former may still have worse taste than the latter.

There is no debunking someone's claim that Troll 2 is their favorite film. But even if the person has seen every horror film ever made you can still debunk their claim that it is the best horror film of all time via well reasoned arguments concerning every aspect of the film... thematic content, formal structure, editing, costume design, script, a holistic criticism, etc and so forth.

With this statement I am not saying there is a single objective best horror film. I am only saying that there are a slew of films that we can consider better constructed, thought out, etc and so forth and we apply a value judgment based on these considerations (re: the post of mine which I linked). Taste is also a fluid and complex entity. It is essentially an on going series of aesthetic value judgments. But I don't buy the line that every aesthetic value judgment is relative. I think aesthetic value judgments have more or less merit based on considerations in regards to the nature of language, beauty and communication vis-a-vis our collective subjectivity.

Apologies if the clarity of my argument is poor. I am very tired, and with that I sleep.

[romantisaurusrex]

No, because pure intake isn't enough to lead to nuanced taste. Awareness and reflection are key components. Someone can have seen 3,000 films and another person 500 and the former may still have worse taste than the latter.

There is no debunking someone's claim that Troll 2 is their favorite film. But even if the person has seen every horror film ever made you can still debunk their claim that it is the best horror film of all time via well reasoned arguments concerning every aspect of the film... thematic content, formal structure, editing, costume design, script, a holistic criticism, etc and so forth.

With this statement I am not saying there is a single objective best horror film. I am only saying that there are a slew of films that we can consider better constructed, thought out, etc and so forth and we apply a value judgment based on these considerations (re: the post of mine which I linked). Taste is also a fluid and complex entity. It is essentially an on going series of aesthetic value judgments. But I don't buy the line that every aesthetic value judgment is relative. I think aesthetic value judgments have more or less merit based on considerations in regards to the nature of language, beauty and communication vis-a-vis our collective subjectivity.

Apologies if the clarity of my argument is poor. I am very tired, and with that I sleep.

Yeah but my earlier point is that if you're going to defer to collective subjectivity the best way to measure it is popularity. There is literally no other way because when I say that Troll 2 is the BEST horror film, not merely my favorite, you can't prove me wrong.

If quality is a thing that exists outside of the objective/subjective binary then it encompasses everything including the consumer of art, not merely the art itself. But if you are going to claim that it follows that quality people enjoy quality media, which more than being steep is elitist to the point of off putting.

I realize everyone is tired of this argument but I'm finding it fun still..

[Dukefrukem]

[

Show Spoiler

]

[number8]

[Qrazy]

Yeah but my earlier point is that if you're going to defer to collective subjectivity the best way to measure it is popularity. There is literally no other way because when I say that Troll 2 is the BEST horror film, not merely my favorite, you can't prove me wrong.

Just to be clear, by collective subjectivity I am just using the term as a Kantian stand-in for what would otherwise be termed objectivity. It is just a work around so that I don't have to be committed to absolute objectivity which is, I agree, unknowable. But I don't mean subjectivity as relativity in regards to art.

Anyway, there are plenty of ways to demonstrate whether a work of art is exceptional or inadequate. We assess the quality of a work from a number of different angles (many of which I mentioned) and then make well reasoned arguments about said work. We are not trying to PROVE in a concrete sense that someone is wrong. Certainly this is impossible, but proving most things in the most rigorous sense is impossible.

We are only trying to use argumentation to elucidate, analyze and critique characteristics in a work. Art is communication and as with communication there are rules to be followed in order to communicate effectively. One can certainly innovate and create new sets of rules and interact in new and interesting and compelling ways, but there are still rules, loose as they are. This is why people study and practice in order to learn to write or photograph or paint better. You learn how to perform a task more effectively. I can demonstrate that Troll 2 is a poor film by analyzing it piece by piece and taken as a whole and critiquing it via a number of different means at my disposal.

If quality is a thing that exists outside of the objective/subjective binary then it encompasses everything including the consumer of art, not merely the art itself. But if you are going to claim that it follows that quality people enjoy quality media, which more than being steep is elitist to the point of off putting.

I realize everyone is tired of this argument but I'm finding it fun still..

I never said that. What I said is that consuming good media is enriching. What is quality in a person anyway? Kindness, intelligence, trustworthiness, and a number of different factors. Quality is a combination of different characteristics/behaviours/actions that we collectively assign value towards. And different people have a number of different valuable traits. It is not any of these single traits alone that gives someone quality, and none of these traits are fixed entities. They are fluid, but not utterly subjective. There is a difference for instance between Idi Amin and the Dalai Lama.

This is just an illustrative example though, as appraising people is certainly quite different from appraising art. People ought to be viewed as ends in themselves whereas we don't need to be quite as gentle with art. Still, it is worth noting that in the general sense when determining if someone is someone we'd like to spend time with we do make value judgments. And typically these value judgments are judgments in relation to how people behave and these behaviours are viewed by people in general in a similar light. For instance, a man who goes out every night and goes into peoples homes and kills their pets, is not a man most people would wish to spend much time with.

[Dukefrukem]

Do you guys mind if I try something here? I am going to post three words over the next few hours. Can you post the first thing that comes to mind when you read it? It can be a single word, a sentence or phrase...

1st word: Burger

[Irish]

MEISTER, MEISTER BURGHER!

[bac0n]

elvis burger with peanut butter, bacon, and fried bananas.

[D_Davis]

MEISTER, MEISTER BURGHER!

Winner winner chicken dinner.

[number8]

Welcome to good burger, home of the good burger, can I take your order?

[Ivan Drago]

Big Kahuna Burger! That's that Hawaiian burger joint. I hear they got some tasty burgers.

[Wryan]

Five Guys inside me.

[Scar]

Do you guys mind if I try something here? I am going to post three words over the next few hours. Can you post the first thing that comes to mind when you read it? It can be a single word, a sentence or phrase...

1st word: Burger

[Insert my signature here]

[Ezee E]

I'd eat one.

[EyesWideOpen]

Red Robin

[Dukefrukem]

Do you guys mind if I try something here? I am going to post three words over the next few hours. Can you post the first thing that comes to mind when you read it? It can be a single word, a sentence or phrase...

1st word: Burger

You can still contribute to the first word if you didn't see this post in time.

2nd word: Coke

[EyesWideOpen]

Diet

[number8]

[D_Davis]

Soda

[Ezee E]

Coca cola.

[Qrazy]

Hey guys what do these Rorschach prints look like to you?



Keep in mind the correct answer is someone's butterfly collection.