On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 2:17 PM, joseph berg <[email protected]> wrote:

>  On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 1:54 PM, William Conger 
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> Whenever something is named art it is assigned a value that is presumed to
>> exemplify something essentially human in imagination or reflective
>> thought.
>>  Although objects can have many purposes in addition to being so-called
>> artworks, the one constant function for artworks  is to evoke feelings
>> that
>> can't be measured or fully shared by other means. So we say.
>>
>> When the doctor asks you to rate your pain from 1 to 10 with 10 signifying
>> acute, excruciating pain, you are being asked to do the impossible.  How
>> does
>> one rank pain?  Is a number two pain eight parts pleasure?  If pain is
>> truly
>> excruciating, a ten,  no sensible response can be made, except perhaps a
>> screech
>> or grunt or some foaming of the mouth or even unconsciousness.  But  some
>> pain
>> can be terrible but not yet incapacitating.  Then there is the mental
>> pain, so
>> bad that it can drive one to suicide, insanity,  or rage or murder. Is
>> that a
>> 10?  How can one rate an aesthetic response?  Is there a number 10
>> response?  Is
>> that ecstasy?  What about, say, a  number 3 aesthetic response?  Or what
>> about
>> the zero response when it's all intellectual as in some conceptual art
>> (for
>> those erring buffs who claim to separate feeling from reasoning)?  How
>> does one
>> price a feeling ...pain or pleasure, fear or affection?  How does one
>> express a
>> number nine pleasure without accounting for the one part pain?
>>  Quantification
>> of art, like any feeling, is impossible.  But because it's impossible we
>> need,
>> must, find some way to quantify it anyway because that's the only means
>> we have
>> to convey its importance.  Name anything that inherently defies being
>> priced and
>> it will be priced anyway.  That's how we know the ineffable exists,
>> somehow.  If
>> we don't price the ineffable then we can't say it exists and we become
>> nihilists. What's the pain/pleasure  number of nihilism?  If I shrug when
>> the
>> doctor asks me to rank my pain, is a 5 recorded or O? is a 0 pain the
>> same as 10
>> pleasure?  This nonsense helps to show that the aesthetic response or
>> experience
>> or feeling is oceanic or unconfined or inseparable from any other
>> responses but
>> claiming some irrational status for it is all we can do to insist it is
>> experienced, and thusly, that we exist.
>>
>
>
> But isn't that like saying that if something cannot be quanitified, then
> it has no value and therefore doesn't exist.?
>
> What about the subjective?
>

And is there no such thing as the qualitative?

Reply via email to