Philosophy Now Forum

Meh. Be glad we don't have giant space billboards.... yet.

They wouldn't bother me.... unless they interfere with the GPS.

Many can't recognize stars as such anyways. No loss.

In LA during a blackout, emergency services got a number of alarmed calls about strange lights in the sky. (Yes, what non-idiots call stars and such.)

'Cherish is the word I use to describe... ' (The Association.)

Skip wrote:Give it a nudge once in a while, else, just leave it go where it likes. It doesn't want to be saved, there's more where it came from.

Hmm. What 'it' are you talking about?
This sounds poetic or from a lyric, is it?

Anyway, it made me think of other things - general and specific attitudes towards relationships which might be affected by 'opinion-influencing layers'.

Who are the opinion-makers or breakers which influence us to change our world views. I think we need to start by looking at ourselves. So, I'll give it a go. I am influenced by what I read on the internet, and sometimes by what I read here on this very forum. There, I said it !

And yes, on here - there is certainly more of where 'it' came from. And sometimes I wish there was an easy means to capture and store the words and the tone in which they are conveyed; the to and fro of some deeply clever people who show the way in social intercourse. Click 'save'.
But then what - it would probably collect and gather dust, just as my special 'junk' does, ('my cup runneth over' )
Eventually the 'cherished', now ignored and unused, has to be cleared out (deleted or destroyed).
Probably, you are right - 'it doesn't want to be saved' but used; there and then to change the rutted grooves. So that other patterns can develop,
Perhaps.

So, to friendships we cherish and the people we develop an affection for. So easily destroyed or damaged by words. Why does it seem easier to give up and move on from friends these days. Is it because we are told ( by some opinion-influencing layer') that any negativity should be avoided, if we wish to prosper emotionally. Or is it that people don't need to 'save' relationships anymore. With greater access to more and more virtual friends.

Again, generalisations are pretty much impossible - each person has a unique take on the importance of friendship. And when it might be time to give one a 'nudge' and see if it has survived neglect.

I can't help thinking of the online friendship I had/have with artisticsolution. The memories of her life stories so vividly told, I still cherish. Our journey through books and art...special.
But on one thread, I think we hurt each other and some trust might have been lost in the process. I regret that.

Leave it go where it likes...and there is more of 'it' where it came from - yes, but sometimes if you care ( there's that word again), some steady steering is involved. Eh, Skip ?
There is only one 'artisticsolution' - 'God' or the 'Devil' Bless her Heart

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:

Nick_A wrote:Welcome to the human condition skip. Our chief characteristic is hypocrisy. We say one thing and do another.

You were probably reading on the Hudson River School. These artists were appreciated during the19thC as depicting the connection between God and nature. Then by the turn of the century the Darwinian revolution was in full bloom so art that was valuable at one time was now considered worthless. The term Hudson River School which is considered a name of respect today was actually a term of derision created by art "experts." You are right skip. Man is capable of both the greatest compassion and the most horrific atrocities. It is the human condition. It is wht we ARE.

Oh right, blame Darwin.

I think he meant the industrial revolution but that's Nick for you. Darwinian revolution must have been something Simone said.

marjoram_blues wrote:

Skip wrote:Give it a nudge once in a while, else, just leave it go where it likes. It doesn't want to be saved, there's more where it came from.

Hmm. What 'it' are you talking about?

I'm pretty sure that was a a comment on the derailment of threads. In that context, "it" would be a topic of discussion, an idea, a train of thought, a discrete subject or something like.
When other people start threads, I sometimes attempt to keep them on, or bring them back to, the original questions. When I start one, it's more likely to be from curiosity about how people react to the title, what people might do with it. So, I don't at all mind if it's derailed or become silly, or simply morphs into something else...
... Like what you just did, so eloquently.

Ok good thread bump, yah!

Aesthetics is an entire separate branch of Philosophy.

Aesthetics asks, "what is art?"

The answer is that anything that evokes an emotional response on canvas or in stone is art.

A beautiful building like the Greek temples is art. The rules of Masonic construction are (1) wisdom, (2) strength, and (3) beauty.

Perfect proportions make a building beautiful.

Perfect proportions make a human body beautiful too.

The landscape anywhere is usually beautiful unless it is an oil and gas or coal mining clean up site.

The sky is beautiful.

The oceans and seas are beautiful too.

The Milky Way Galaxy in the night sky is beautiful too.

The Andromeda Galaxy 2 1/2 light years away as seen through a telescope is beautiful too.

The Hubble Deep Field Galaxy Cluster is beautiful and the most stunning thing ever seen by the eyes of humankind. This adds a whole new meaning to "Prime Mover" -- now the concept is more appropriately called "Prime Movers" -- pluralized.

There must be an entire Nation Of Gods to create all the galaxies we have recently discovered with Hubble.

Skip wrote:I've just read that the most popular art of the mid- to late-nineteenth century was idyllic landscapes ...
the very thing the industrial age was laying waste at the time; collected and admired by the very people who profited from its destruction.

When there is a lot of pious talk about peace, you know we're arming for war.

These days, we hear a great deal about the preciousness of children, and the importance of protecting them and their future. Meanwhile, drug traffic, sea levels and college fees are rising.

The main threat of war in the present day are two -- Russia and China.

Russia wants to return to its former greatness and Putin is lusting to give the Russian peoples what they want.

China wants Taiwan back but he US Navy is not going to let them have it.

Thus the US Army and USAF will likely soon be involved in another massive European war, while the USN and USMC are preoccupied with fighting China.

History seems to be repeating itself all over again -- the 21st Century is starting out just like the 20th did about 100 years ago.

China has taken Japan's place as the local Asian superpower.

Russia has always been a superpower throughout their history.

Germany and the UK are both gone as superpowers though.

Nick_A wrote:Welcome to the human condition skip. Our chief characteristic is hypocrisy. We say one thing and do another.

You were probably reading on the Hudson River School. These artists were appreciated during the19thC as depicting the connection between God and nature. Then by the turn of the century the Darwinian revolution was in full bloom so art that was valuable at one time was now considered worthless. The term Hudson River School which is considered a name of respect today was actually a term of derision created by art "experts." You are right skip. Man is capable of both the greatest compassion and the most horrific atrocities. It is the human condition. It is wht we ARE.

I think people start out tabula rasa -- this is one of the fundamental principles of Empiricism.

What they become after that depends largely on their parents, their school teachers, their friends, their priests/ministers (Protestants don't like being called Priests), and anybody else who comes into contact with them.

A very resilient person can overcome environmental influences, but resilience is an exceptional trait not the norm.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:

Nick_A wrote:Welcome to the human condition skip. Our chief characteristic is hypocrisy. We say one thing and do another.

You were probably reading on the Hudson River School. These artists were appreciated during the19thC as depicting the connection between God and nature. Then by the turn of the century the Darwinian revolution was in full bloom so art that was valuable at one time was now considered worthless. The term Hudson River School which is considered a name of respect today was actually a term of derision created by art "experts." You are right skip. Man is capable of both the greatest compassion and the most horrific atrocities. It is the human condition. It is wht we ARE.

Oh right, blame Darwin.

Darwin only observed and wrote a book about what the ancient Greeks already knew -- that humans evolved from fishes.

Impenitent wrote:disturbed by gruesome pictures of dead bodies from war?

don't play call of duty

yolo

-Imp

Photos of the dead are revolting to a normal person with empathy, yes.

It takes a very hard heart to kill. You must first hate your enemy before you can kill him or her.

There is absolutely no excuse for killing a child however. Children are innocent in their pre-programmed state of non-brainwashing.

Thus photos of dead children are especially revolting.

Photos capture reality at any given moment.

Paintings and sculptures are much less revolting than photographs.

Are photographs art? Well if they evoke an emotional response then truly they are, yes.

yiostheoy wrote:

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:

Nick_A wrote:Welcome to the human condition skip. Our chief characteristic is hypocrisy. We say one thing and do another.

You were probably reading on the Hudson River School. These artists were appreciated during the19thC as depicting the connection between God and nature. Then by the turn of the century the Darwinian revolution was in full bloom so art that was valuable at one time was now considered worthless. The term Hudson River School which is considered a name of respect today was actually a term of derision created by art "experts." You are right skip. Man is capable of both the greatest compassion and the most horrific atrocities. It is the human condition. It is wht we ARE.

Oh right, blame Darwin.

Darwin only observed and wrote a book about what the ancient Greeks already knew -- that humans evolved from fishes.

Yet another topic you know nothing about. What a surprise.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Yet another topic you know nothing about. What a surprise.

You have no justification to jump to that hasty conclusion either.

Either you think you are smart or you know nothing at all. Those are your 2 common characteristics.

I am not overly enthused about talking to a male gay like yourself so from now on you are going onto the ignore list.

Good luck with your psychological hangups.

Why do you even log-in here ??

You seem to know nothing about Philosophy and even less about Empirical Science.

Skip wrote:

marjoram_blues wrote:

Skip wrote:Give it a nudge once in a while, else, just leave it go where it likes. It doesn't want to be saved, there's more where it came from.

Hmm. What 'it' are you talking about?

I'm pretty sure that was a a comment on the derailment of threads. In that context, "it" would be a topic of discussion, an idea, a train of thought, a discrete subject or something like.
When other people start threads, I sometimes attempt to keep them on, or bring them back to, the original questions. When I start one, it's more likely to be from curiosity about how people react to the title, what people might do with it. So, I don't at all mind if it's derailed or become silly, or simply morphs into something else...
... Like what you just did, so eloquently.

Thanks for returning to the scene. Skip.
And I appreciate all your thoughts and encouragement. About any 'eloquence' - it's a bit of a hit or miss with me. Sometimes, the words flow effortlessly and in a convenient order...other times, not so much ! Plenty of scope for entanglement - getting in deep and slide-y. I was grateful for the chance to speak about...well, what I spoke about