Orn, I will not depreciating your gnosis in any way intentionally. I admit to wearing blinders concerning anything approaching the metaphysical. Also, my stubbornmost self dictates that I color within the lines of determinism/scientific naturalism. Probably you would consider it a handicapped life. It is a weird twist that I am third generation artist with all the accompanying skills, but hardwired with an enduring affinity for all things scientific. It was a painful personal paradox to live with...at first. But, it is possible to create great art with only emotion and technical skill sans the influences of supernaturalism, so I have found balance. I'm not special in this mix of science and art though, there have been many with the most famous of them being Leonardo Da Vinci. He was the same wierd mix of creative and mechanical ( in no way assume I liken my skills to his, or that my ego is that big:)). Too many artistic stereotypes have shaped our perceptions of what it takes to be a career artist and turned it into a overly emotive silly-stupid acid-eating caricature of the real thing (not to say that many "artists" are not nutjobs) or that you have to be in excruciating depression or pain to do "great art". Big joke that one! Many do promote the image of the artist as a conduit of metaphysical energies.
Methods of apprehension trancending the physical? I fall short of that because I feel all methods of apprehension are purely physical in a physical universe. I would love to get smacked over the head with something trancendental! I feel cheated sometimes because I have never experienced anything remotely paranormal. No ghosts, voices, premonitions, coincidences, etc. Anytime now would be great though:) On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 1:52 PM, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > "…so what is the trump card after all???" – CB > > Of course we all have our own individual notions of what is > attractive, what is not-attractive and what is neutral. This applies > to just about everything, doesn't it? > > Any 'answers' to your query CB will most likely be based upon an > individual bias and, perhaps limited view. This gives me an > opportunity to implement a recent addition to my vocabulary, > gnosiology. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosiology > > It appears to include all ways of 'knowing'. Not just a few. And, the > 'glow' I meant was not just physical health. It included methods of > apprehension transcending just the physical. > > > On Nov 17, 11:23 am, CrossBow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Trance like state? More like prevailing desperation to get and hang on to > > the best that you can be whether it is mentally/physically good for you > or > > not. Nasty bit of delusion. The guys on the cover of Men's Health are > no > > more realistic than what is on Vogue. Liz's earlier painting was based > on > > Greek/Roman ideals of womanly beauty which was pre-surgery, lipo, > > air-brushing, extreme fitness freak-outs, right? If I were to guess at > what > > we should look like without all this delusional crap, that lady in her > > painting would be close to base-natural. She looks chubby - but not > exactly > > flabby....more BMI neutral. > > > > Just my personal opinion, but most of the research that I have > > read/experienced with beauty (and all the nudes I've drawn) have all > pointed > > to the physically healthy and symmetrical as the epitome of > > beautiful. It's interesting to be in a room with supremely athletic > people > > and have a non-athletic beauty walk in. She or he will > > seem somehow diminished with the obviously healthy choices to > investigate. > > Judging beauty in the flesh is so different because of the additional > > variables that go into play. A two dimensional portrait we judge on > limited > > senses of symmetry and the current cultural ideal sans pheremones in > smell, > > contact, and moving body language, voice tone, message, etc. That lady > in > > Liz's painting appeared too fat for most of us today, especially those > that > > are happy-complacent with the current ideal of emaciation. > > > > So, symmetry and cosmetic surgery is effective, but does not trump health > > and happiness ( as Orn mentioned that "glow"). Find the golden mean, > whether > > it is plastic or not, and you usually find what most everyone will > > qualify as beautiful in every culture. I personally believe that smell > and > > overall body symmetry is possibly more powerful. Maybe our inner caveman > > keeps a weather eye open for all and any possible mates? I've met some > less > > than standard-cute people that were uber-attractive, so what is the trump > > card after all??? > > > > On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 12:29 PM, ornamentalmind > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is obvious to me, perhaps because of my gender, is that in the > > > current US culture, the omnipresence of beauty industry advertising > > > along with programs on corporate tv and radio have been fairly > > > successful in producing a trance like state within too many women. > > > > > The 'avarousness' found at the heart of consumerism has been quite > > > successful in supplanting a clear view of reality within the female > > > brain with one of being born in the 'original sin' of having a > > > lack...lack of beauty, lack of the right shape, color, height, length > > > nails, texture of skin etc. > > > > > My entire life, while I do know how my eye appreciates specific shapes > > > and colors, I find those with inner beauty to be in fact beautiful > > > when it comes to human beings. Anyone who has this pure radiance is > > > immediately apprehended as being beautiful. > > > > > Those who do not know this innate and true beauty appear to be sad and > > > have a sad life. > > > > > On Nov 17, 8:39 am, CrossBow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Google and image Tiziano Vicellio > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 9:49 PM, Liz Purkrabek < > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > I'm not familiar with his works, but I will definitely do a Google > > > search > > > > > to > > > > > see what else he has to offer. > > > > > > > liz > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: [email protected] > > > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > > > > > ornamentalmind > > > > > Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2008 8:36 PM > > > > > To: Memphis Freethought Alliance > > > > > Subject: Re: I like this picture. I found it while looking for > other > > > > > pictures > > > > > > > Liz, I've long been a big fan of Sandro Botticelli!!! > > > > > > > On Nov 15, 11:32 am, "Liz Purkrabek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > > See, ladies could be born beautiful back then. Now it takes so > much > > > work > > > > > > and/or surgery... > > > > > > > > LIz > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: [email protected] > > > > > > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of BC > > > > > > Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2008 1:30 PM > > > > > > To: Memphis Freethought Alliance > > > > > > Subject: Re: I like this picture. I found it while looking for > other > > > > > > pictures > > > > > > > > On Nov 15, 8:33 am, "Liz Purkrabek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > > > [The+Wave.jpg] > > > > > > > > That is a nice pic; but she could stand to lose about a 20-spot. > > > > > > -BC-- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
