From: Cari Machet (email suppressed)
Date: Tue Jan 30 2007 - 12:46:00 PST
if you consider art this way then u really don't understand art history
(and the calculable uses of...)
art history precludes written history
(it is sort of like ur saying the first grunt of man wasn't practical
bcause it didn't explain fully the inner workings and purpose of the
universe)
our knowledge is held/expressed in art
- the art of any given time -
the flow (and halt-inversion) of time/space and the construct of 'reality'
is held in art - for instance
the greeks could replicate precisely the human form
then later in medieval times that knowledge was 'lost'
- the dark ages - these times were ruled by the catholic church
it was an oppressive time and the art holds that information and expresses
it
(and probably helped alot of people to get thru that time w/out committing
suicide[sorta practical])
+
as it has been eloquently stated 'we stand on the shoulders of giants'
i would say though it is not overtly practical it has practicality within it
(as does all of history)
+
the comparative use of practical as opposed to theoretical is at play
(in the context we were using it)
moreover the philosophical ramifications that underly arts activity
is dimensionless and has no boundaries such as 'theory' and 'practical'
besides i believe that art is life so to say that art is not practical is to
say that life is not practical
well maybe it isn't but again it has practicality within
it's a great question though
i think that the dadaist probably can speak allot to this question
more on 'practicality':
pragmatism
Philosophical movement first given systematic expression by Charles Sanders
Peirce <http://www.answers.com/topic/charles-peirce> and William
James<http://www.answers.com/topic/william-james>and later taken up
and transformed by John
Dewey <http://www.answers.com/topic/john-dewey>. Pragmatists emphasize the
practical function of knowledge as an instrument for adapting to reality and
controlling it. Pragmatism agrees with
empiricism<http://www.answers.com/topic/empiricism>in its emphasis on
the priority of experience over a
priori <http://www.answers.com/topic/a-priori> reasoning. Whereas truth had
traditionally been explained in terms of correspondence with reality or in
terms of coherence (see coherentism<http://www.answers.com/topic/coherentism>),
pragmatism holds that truth is to be found in the process of verification.
Pragmatists interpret ideas as instruments and plans of action rather than
as images of reality; more specifically, they are suggestions and
anticipations of possible conduct, hypotheses or forecasts of what will
result from a given action, or ways of organizing behaviour. See also W.V.O.
Quine <http://www.answers.com/topic/w-v-quine>; Richard
Rorty<http://www.answers.com/topic/richard-rorty>
.
+
coherentism
Theory of truth according to which a belief is true just in case, or to the
extent that, it coheres with a system of other beliefs. Philosophers have
differed over the relevant sense of "cohere," though most agree that it must
be stronger than mere consistency. Among rival theories of truth, perhaps
the oldest is the correspondence theory, which holds that the truth of a
belief consists in its correspondence with independently existing facts. In
epistemology, coherentism contrasts with
foundationalism<http://www.answers.com/topic/foundationalism>,
which asserts that ordinary beliefs are justified if they are inferrable
from a set of basic beliefs that are justified immediately or directly.
Coherentism often has been combined with the idealist doctrine that reality
consists of, or is knowable only through, ideas or judgments (see
idealism<http://www.answers.com/topic/idealism>
).
i am a rationalist
(but very socratial)
rationalism:
The theory that the exercise of reason, rather than experience, authority,
or spiritual revelation, provides the primary basis for knowledge.
- reason is calculable
c
On 1/30/07, Nicholas Hamlyn < email suppressed> wrote:
>
> On 27 Jan 2007, at 00:30, Cari Machet wrote:
>
> >
> > academic:
> >
>
> > Having no practical purpose or use.
>
> Like art, for example?
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________
> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at < email suppressed>.
>
On 1/30/07, James Macgillivray <email suppressed> wrote:
>
> We can discuss subject (below) under above subject heading. I hope.
>
> I say, "not practical"
>
> >From: saul ostrow
>
> >Reply-To: Experimental Film Discussion List <email suppressed>
> >To: email suppressed
> >Subject: Re: HH - response
> >Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 08:04:11 -0500
> >
> >actually art has many practical purposes and uses - until it becomes
> >standardized, cliched and banal
> >On Jan 30, 2007, at 4:40 AM, Nicholas Hamlyn wrote:
> >
> >>On 27 Jan 2007, at 00:30, Cari Machet wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>academic:
> >>>
> >>
> >>> Having no practical purpose or use.
> >>
> >>Like art, for example?
> >>
> >>
> >>__________________________________________________________________
> >>For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
> >>
> >>--
> >>This message has been scanned for viruses and
> >>dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> >>believed to be clean.
> >
> >
> >__________________________________________________________________
> >For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Buy what you want when you want it on Sympatico / MSN Shopping
>
> http://shopping.sympatico.msn.ca/content/shp/?ctId=2,ptnrid=176,ptnrdata=081805
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________
> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
>
__________________________________________________________________
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.