Comment by refugee

December 3, 2006 @ 5:47 pm

Kant wrote a defined of aesthetic as both, “the analysis of taste and the analysis of sensible cognition or intuition” (1). Aesthesis, means “sensation”, the Greeks made a distinction between aesthesis autophues (natural sensation) and aesthesis epistemonike (acquired sensation) (1). We may say that aesthetics is both the study of aesthetic objects and of the specific and subjective reactions of observers, readers, or audiences to the work of art. Aesthetics is necessarily interdisciplinary and may be interpretive, prescriptive, descriptive, or a combination of these. The big,or the samall , obvious question about aesthetic value is whether it is ever ‘really in’ the objects it is attributed toin th subjectivec. This issue parallels the realism/anti-realism debates elsewhere in philosophy (2). Though there is a little reason to assume that aesthetic value will behave in just the say or the way ,way as for example, moral value. An extreme realist would say that aesthetic values reside in an object as properties notinced by any observer’s responses, (3) and that if we make the judgment ‘That is a beautiful flower’, or ‘this painting is aesthetically good’, what we say is true or false – true if the flower or painting has the property, false if it does not. We will tend to like the object if we recognize the aesthetic value in it, but, for the realist, whether we recognize it and whether it is are two separate questions. Consequently, much work in aesthetics has gone into. The idea is that the pleasurable experience of attending to something in perception should not consist in liking a thing only because it fulfills some definite function, satisfies a desire, or lives up to a prior standard or principle (4). There are subjective responses which we are justified in demanding from others: these are not idiosyncratic likes and dislikes, but deeply rooted in our common nature as experiencing subjects, and founded on a pleasurable response to the form of the object as it is presented in perception. This means, among other things, “aesthetic value cannot be enshrined in learnable principles” (5). There are no genuine aesthetic principles, because to find aesthetic value we must, “get a look at the object with our own eyes” (5). Aesthetic judgments are founded upon the slender basis of one’s own feeling of pleasure, but can justifiably claim the universal agreement if the subjective response in question is one that which any properly equipped observer would have. Sometimes it is assumed that the prime interest in art is aesthetic, but that assumption bears some examination. nature of philosophy as a whole is nothing of words that wode ae us ,wher is the truth ? only one above is cal tell or know . Love and care for adam and you.

Comment by refugee

December 6, 2006 @ 3:43 am

I am not sure if I was right ,to put the remark ,because now that I re read this old essay that once I needed to learn how to enhance harmony within my self to cope with the (that time ) unknown chaos of art of music coupled with lyrics particularly those that meant something to me such as Killing me Softly by Roberta Falg ,it must have been years ago ,when I was and still is looking for such harmony of the soul integrated into the taste of how time can brink to gather the feeling of artistic order in my life ,when I read your post I could not stop reading the lyrics again and again “No music “,this time for the first time my search trumped up while reading the relics of Yusuf Islam the same Cat Stevens I did not care for but this “Maybe There’s a World” changed a lot of things ,that’s why I remarked [Kant definition of aesthetic as both, “the analysis of taste and the analysis of sensible congestion] only a self intuition I should have explained my self there and then ,you can omit after reading ,it may prove to be boring .

Comment by Eman

December 8, 2006 @ 10:39 am

Dear Refugee,
Your comments are never ever boring, there’s always something to learn from your words. The only reason I didn’t reply earlier is because I didn’t have the time to get online, can you imagine!!
Anyway, reading along your first comment I concluded what you said in the second comment. I understood that this explanation is due to something that has changed your artistic taste in a way, I wasn’t sure how, but I somehow understood, so thanks for the second comment that explained things better.

After reading your first comment I couldn’t help but think: wow, someone has been making some serious research! I admit I didn’t know this information before you were kind enough to share it with me and my readers.

You know, there’s something about me that I guess I took from my mom, I never listen to songs in terms of music alone, you’ll find me focusing on the lyrics a big deal not wanting to miss a word, digging for the written lyrics to enjoy it better. Many people hate this about me and tell me: can’t u simply enjoy the music?
I guess lyrics, to me, add this magical touch to the accompanying melodies and give the song a much deeper aspect and a warmth that flatters the music.

Anyway, again, many thanks for your comment, and please feel free to share us more of your knowledge on any topic

Comment by refugee

December 9, 2006 @ 2:29 am

Eman ,if you are on line check your Gmail ,best wishes .

Comment by Eman

December 9, 2006 @ 2:36 am

Thanks for the nice surprise, I was going to sleep when I decided to check my blog one last time and there I found your lovely email. You always make my day.
I appreciate your comments and emails so much, be sure of that.
I’m so tired I feel I may get a heart attack, so I guess I need to go sleep right away.
Many thanks again