Sunday, March 22, 2015
Art and Religion XVII: Arthur Danto
read, I think the first chapter (pdf): 'The Philosophical Disenfranchisement of Art'
and his essay (pdf): 'The End of Art: A Philosophical Defense'
Listen to the entire podcast (2 hr discussion), and more info on Danto, at the Partially Examined Life
*if you haven't noticed, in some of these 'Art and Religion' posts I've been hinting and wondering what would happen if we substituted the term 'art' with 'religion' and whether the statement or argument could still apply.
In this case, in tribute to the late Arthur Danto, can we discuss 'the disenfranchisement of religion' or 'the end of religion'?
Art and ReligionXVI: Leo Tolstoy
"In order correctly to define art, it is necessary, first
of all, to cease to consider it as a means to pleasure and to consider
it as one of the conditions of human life. Viewing it in this way we
cannot fail to observe that art is one of the means of intercourse
between man and man.
Every work of art causes the receiver to enter into a certain kind of relationship both with him who produced, or is producing, the art, and with all those who, simultaneously, previously, or subsequently, receive the same artistic impression.
[…]
The activity of art is based on the fact that a man, receiving through his sense of hearing or sight another man’s expression of feeling, is capable of experiencing the emotion which moved the man who expressed it. … And it is upon this capacity of man to receive another man’s expression of feeling and experience those feelings himself, that the activity of art is based."
Source
Every work of art causes the receiver to enter into a certain kind of relationship both with him who produced, or is producing, the art, and with all those who, simultaneously, previously, or subsequently, receive the same artistic impression.
[…]
The activity of art is based on the fact that a man, receiving through his sense of hearing or sight another man’s expression of feeling, is capable of experiencing the emotion which moved the man who expressed it. … And it is upon this capacity of man to receive another man’s expression of feeling and experience those feelings himself, that the activity of art is based."
Source
Friday, March 20, 2015
Marx on Love and Religion
"If you love without evoking love in return, i.e. if you are not able, by the manifestation of yourself as a loving person, to make yourself a beloved person, then your love is impotent and a misfortune."
-Karl Marx 'The Power of Money' (1844)
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions."
- Karl Marx 'Introduction to A Contribution to A Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right' (1844)
The Boy with No Penis
This case is referenced in the debate on history v. nature. Twins; but during the circumcision procedure, as infants, one lost his penis. The doctors decide to raise him as a girl - this is the documentary.
Debate: Humans have no nature, what they have is history
IUAES World Anthropology Congress, Manchester, 2013. Venue: Bridgewater Hall.
Plenary Debate: "Humans have no nature, what they have is history".
Chair: Marilyn Strathern (Cambridge University).
Speakers:
Motion
Tim Ingold (Aberdeen University) - social anthropologist
Second
Veena Das (Johns Hopkins University) - anthropologist/philosopher
Oppose
Ruth Mace (University College London)- evolutionary anthropologist
Second
Juichi Yamagiwa (Kyoto University) - primatologist
http://www.livinganthropologically.com/anthropology/human-nature/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)