26 Mar 11
Originally posted by DowardSpecies 'A' has discerned some quality which differentiates him from the other species. He therefore decides that this quality is of a 'higher order.'
[b]Orders of happiness is somewhat ambiguous is what I was getting at
I disagree. A slight disclaimer here: The actual qoute should be ""it is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied". I shortened it for expedience, though that was likely a mistake.
Happiness can be di ...[text shortened]... type of happiness, the animal pleasures and appetites have less of an impact and seem petty.[/b]
26 Mar 11
1 edit
Originally posted by avalanchethecatNow we are on to something. If happiness is pleasure and the absence of pain, then the purpose of existance could easily be said to be happiness. Human beings purposefully seek pleasure and avoid pain, both to great lengths.
Sure. Although of course, some things feel good in the short term, but end up feeling bad in the long term. So a hint of circumspection is advisable.
The attainment of food and its subsequent ingestion is a source of pleasure, procreation is also a source of pleasure, our very most basic drives are around things that give us pleasure.
When food supplies become ample, and a society has the ability to store food, then the extra time needed gets spent in intellectual pursuits of the next highest order, mainly technology that will produce even greater amounts of food, and technology that will defend that food supply.
When these goals have been achieved our faculties lead us to the next level of intellectual achievement, writing and ccomplex communication. Records are kept to accurately catalogue history and track food and wealth stores. Eventually this leads to art, both literary and visual.
When a society has ample time for the developement of art (of a more sophisticated nature and not simple cave drawings), then there is opportunity for philosophy, both emperical (sciences) and a priori. We can concentrate on reason and intellect, understanding the world around us in ways that we would not be afforded if we were engaged in the day to day struggle of providing the merest existance.
The purpose of humanity is to seek happiness, from that society is created.
26 Mar 11
Originally posted by DowardIt could be argued that the quest for happiness is one of those targets which, due to the transitory nature of such emotional states, is ultimately self-defeating.
Now we are on to something. If happiness is pleasure and the absence of pain, then the purpose of existance could easily be said to be happiness. Human beings purposefully seek pleasure and avoid pain, both to great lengths.
The attainment of food and its subsequent ingestion is a source of pleasure, procreation is also a source of pleasure, our very most ...[text shortened]... merest existance.
The purpose of humanity is to seek happiness, from that society is created.
26 Mar 11
Originally posted by ua41The hierarchy of human wants as spelt out by Abraham Maslow, the social scientist,says the same thing. We progress from animal level wants such as food to clothing to shelter to higher levels such as having a satisfying job, having wealth and social status to appreciation of Art,Philosophy. It is an evolution in a way.
For the most part, I agree with this. I'm the first to talk out against people getting caught up in useless things (e.g. feeding the flesh desires), materialism etc. Living in the san francisco bay area, a lot of hearts around here are cold, and the social structure (culturally, economically/financially, and even infrastructure wise) keeps us penned up like cat ...[text shortened]... d in sculptures? See the potential that everything has- it's all in front of us.
26 Mar 11
Originally posted by rvsakhadeoAnd the path to happiness is through minimizing those artificial wants. The striving after "satisfying" jobs, wealth and social status are the source of all unhappiness. Art and philosophy are the mere byproducts of an increasingly alienated society.
The hierarchy of human wants as spelt out by Abraham Maslow, the social scientist,says the same thing. We progress from animal level wants such as food to clothing to shelter to higher levels such as having a satisfying job, having wealth and social status to appreciation of Art,Philosophy. It is an evolution in a way.
26 Mar 11
3 edits
Originally posted by avalanchethecatBut pleasures are like poppies spread,
Sure. Although of course, some things feel good in the short term, but end up feeling bad in the long term. So a hint of circumspection is advisable.
You seize the flow'r, its bloom is shed;
Or like the snow falls in the river,
A moment white - then melts for ever;
Or like the Borealis race,
That flit ere you can point their place;
Or like the Rainbow's lovely form
Evanishing amid the storm. -
R.Burns
indeed cat dude, remember the 'tail', of Tam O'Shanters mare and what happens if
you drink too much whiskey and chase after young women sporting short skirts!
26 Mar 11
Originally posted by rwingettwhat about folk art?
And the path to happiness is through minimizing those artificial wants. The striving after "satisfying" jobs, wealth and social status are the source of all unhappiness. Art and philosophy are the mere byproducts of an increasingly alienated society.
26 Mar 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe degree to which art is separated out from the rhythms of daily life is the degree to which it is a symptom of a pathologically alienated society. When we recognize 'art' as a distinct and separate category, then we should suspect there is something wrong with our human condition. A 'folk art' which is seamlessly integrated into, and indistinguishable from, the routines of daily life ceases to be 'art' as we commonly conceptualize it.
what about folk art?
26 Mar 11
1 edit
Originally posted by rwingettYou are presenting 'art', as if it were a type of litmus test for pathological alienation, which, in terms of a modern perspective, it may well be, but it was not always the case, one thinks of the great tapestry's, the mosaics of the east, the book illustrations of the Russian, Bilibin, the arts and crafts movements of the 19th century, William Morris, Rennie Macintosh etc all produced great functional 'art.'
The degree to which art is separated out from the rhythms of daily life is the degree to which it is a symptom of a pathologically alienated society. When we recognize 'art' as a distinct and separate category, then we should suspect there is something wrong with our human condition. A 'folk art' which is seamlessly integrated into, and indistinguishable from, the routines of daily life ceases to be 'art' as we commonly conceptualize it.
26 Mar 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieTo be merely functional is not enough. As long art is commodified for sale then it is symptomatic of a pathological alienation. An 'art' which is made for daily use, or for non-commercial purposes, by people who do not specialize as 'artists', can be part of a non-alienated life.
You are presenting 'art', as if it were a type of litmus test for pathological alienation, which, in terms of a modern perspective, it may well be, but it was not always the case, one thinks of the great tapestry's, the mosaics of the east, the book illustrations of the Russian, Bilibin, the arts and crafts movements of the 19th century, William Morris, Rennie Macintosh etc all produced great functional 'art.'