I think Cheerskep is right although I would prefer that he distinguish more clearly between "mind" and "mind independent" assuming that whatever the former is it cannot be replicated in the latter but must be symbolized somehow. This is what I want to focus on, the symbol, as a public artifact. As such it reflects the opinions and collective social values. And they, of course, change continually, either by slow evolution or by radical revisionism. The artwork is a symbol. What we say about it is necessarily a socialized commentary or judgment. How that symbol is purely experienced, in mind, cannot be expressed except by the symbol or a surrogate symbol. That's what leads me to say that the "aesthetic experience" cannot be related. We can only employ symbols that stand in for that experience -- and we may debate them, refine them, rank them, replace them, and use them as signs of learning or status or honor, but we are always dealing with the symbols and not the actual subjective experience. So, again, we cannot know what the subjective aesthetic experience consists of (even though we assuredly do experience) without creating an objective symbol of it. And that, the symbol, we can talk about in every way imaginable.
When Cheerskep wishes to understand the aesthetic experience, he must be limited to investigating its symbols. Those symbols are inextricalbly embedded in social context. WC --- On Tue, 11/18/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Improving taste > To: [email protected] > Date: Tuesday, November 18, 2008, 10:43 AM > Of course we can "judge" someone else's > aesthetic response -- in the sense > that we can have personal disdain for the person's > sensibility as evidenced, > say, by his asserting that Bach, Beethoven and Mozart bore > or disgust him, and he > much prefers rap. > > What we can't do is prove that his sensibility is > absolutely right or wrong > -- where by 'absolutely' I mean we can't cite > any mind-independent "fact of the > matter". "Literature" has many examples of > works/authors who were once held > in the highest reverence and later fell into disrepute. > Consider the cyclical > reputation of John Milton and his "Paradise Lost" > as "judged" by esteemed > literary sensibilities over the centuries. > > > ************** > Get the Moviefone > Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news & > more!(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212774565x1200812037/aol?redir=http://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download > .html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000001)
