Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
----- Original Message ----- From: "samba -" <sambacomet@hotmail.com> > I wish more critics employed Kris's approach. I much prefer >statements > such as ,"I like x because it makes me feel x to statements like,this >is > good,this is crap ,you'll be happy if you buy this etc. > Without getting into semiotics,I see meanings and asthetics as tending > to have cultural elements that aren't purely subjective. In a culture >that > fetishizes individuality,and pushes the value of indivudual choice, as >it > supports consumerism subjective aesthetics can be described as >culturally > based. Good catch, Samba. I think you are correct. I believe this is where we move from subjectivism to cultural relativism (still not objectivism, IMO). It is an interesting transition when the combined subjective and enduring emotive states of a community or society gain enough momentum and solidarity to become a cultural phenomenon. This applies not just to aesthetics, but ethics, metaphysics, religion, etc. However, this is where it gets scary and can lead to mass belief in ideas to the extent that they are considered universally true. I don't need to mention all the madmen in our history who have led to the death and suffering of millions of human beings because an idea gained momentum in a society or culture. Mass acceptance does not entail universal truth and objectivity...otherwise, we'd still be pushing the flat earth and geocentric models of the solar system. And coming back to Andy's last response to my post, I think this above transition is what can often lead to either a fallacious or misleading ways of talking about objectivity. One common, non-philosophical idea of objectivity really has little to do with epistemology (the study of the conditions for knowledge, etc) per se, but simply the idea of many people having a similar view point or agreeing that they observe or perceive the same way. This simply means that we are moving from one person's mind to the collective overlap of multiple viewpoints. However, I would argue, again, that this type of objectivity does not logically imply the type of objectivity we discuss in epistemology, where for a statement to be considered objective, it must more than a shared viewpoint, but Universally True. Very few, if any statements in the history of human though meet any degree of agreed upon criteria to achieve this status, perhaps mathematical and logic statements, but those are empty of empirical content. Great thread.... Kris > I'm also interested in psychoacoustics,how the physical effects of >sound > on the body affect mood,emotion etc. For example,loud fast rhythm being > exciting ,or creating the feeling of excitement seems neither personal >or > cultural.Of course some individuals and societies may value such > excitement,some disdain it,some forbid it and others institutionalise >it.I > other words they assign values/aesthetics to the physical responses in a > culturally determined way,at least partially. > > _________________________________________________________________ > Don't miss your chance to WIN 10 hours of private jet travel from > Microsoft® Office Live > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/mcrssaub0540002499mrt/direct/01/ > >