Is art and music dying?

Use this forum to have philosophical discussions about aesthetics and art. What is art? What is beauty? What makes art good? You can also use this forum to discuss philosophy in the arts, namely to discuss the philosophical points in any particular movie, TV show, book or story.
Cogito ergo sum
Moderator
Posts: 174
Joined: June 11th, 2014, 2:32 am
Favorite Philosopher: Karl Popper

Is art and music dying?

Post by Cogito ergo sum » September 3rd, 2014, 6:49 pm

Do you think that art and music is a way to express things that science and philosophy have not yet expressed and that the more we understand the less relevant art and music will become? Or do you think art and music are separate and will always be around as a form of human expression? Thank you and I am very interested in hearing your responses.

User avatar
Present awareness
Posts: 1231
Joined: February 3rd, 2014, 7:02 pm

Re: Is art and music dying?

Post by Present awareness » September 3rd, 2014, 7:12 pm

Cogito ergo sum wrote:Do you think that art and music is a way to express things that science and philosophy have not yet expressed and that the more we understand the less relevant art and music will become? Or do you think art and music are separate and will always be around as a form of human expression? Thank you and I am very interested in hearing your responses.
You are talking about three separate forms of communication. Science and philosophy communicate thru words and ideas. Music communicates thru sound vibrations, tones and rhythm, whereas art communicates thru visual expression.

As long as humans experience emotions, music and art will always have a place in our culture. If however, humans become completely logical, (Mr. Spock on Star Trek), then perhaps music and art will gradually die out.
Even though you can see me, I might not be here.

Artimas
Posts: 565
Joined: August 3rd, 2014, 11:23 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Plato
Location: Oregon, US

Re: Is art and music dying?

Post by Artimas » September 3rd, 2014, 8:03 pm

Influence is partial to what all derive from.

Language being a huge influence, as well as color. Knowledge and influence is what the world/reality derive from, you learn this, and you will have power, you will have answers.
"My ancestors are smiling on me, Imperials. Can you say the same?"

"Science Fiction today ~ Science Fact tomorrow"

Change is inevitable, it can only be delayed or sped up. Choose wisely.

Truth is pain, and pain is gain.

Jklint
Posts: 1199
Joined: February 23rd, 2012, 3:06 am

Re: Is art and music dying?

Post by Jklint » September 3rd, 2014, 11:45 pm

Cogito ergo sum wrote:Do you think that art and music is a way to express things that science and philosophy have not yet expressed and that the more we understand the less relevant art and music will become?
What is knowledge except a re-creation, the discovery of what makes the world tick. It is not his creation and does not specifically denote man as much as it denotes intelligence regardless of what planet it exists on.

Art on the other hand is a unique creation indigenous to the beings which create it and encompasses everything from cities to symphonies. Even philosophy falls within its orbit.

User avatar
Didge
New Trial Member
Posts: 4
Joined: January 9th, 2014, 10:14 am

Re: Is art and music dying?

Post by Didge » September 4th, 2014, 4:47 pm

Cogito ergo sum wrote:Do you think that art and music is a way to express things that science and philosophy have not yet expressed and that the more we understand the less relevant art and music will become? Or do you think art and music are separate and will always be around as a form of human expression? Thank you and I am very interested in hearing your responses.
the best thing about art is the preparation, the thinking ahead, thinking and rethinking of the work, and the actual creative process. With relish alone enjoying. You can bring to expression your philosophy, sell through music contenders as you play, you can also paint, knit, create sculptures, garden design, architecture, in particular, what do you think of an activity during your philosophy. Of course we can also keep idle for us our thoughts. The more we have already done, the less we need to do.

User avatar
Skillz
Posts: 19
Joined: September 6th, 2014, 9:44 am
Favorite Philosopher: Tristan Tzara
Location: Missouri, USA

Re: Is art and music dying?

Post by Skillz » September 6th, 2014, 12:22 pm

The logical outcome of science is a world devoid of mystery, but music and art, like dance, would still have a social function.

User avatar
Mirosurabu
Posts: 26
Joined: August 8th, 2013, 8:53 am
Favorite Philosopher: Nietzsche
Location: Roman Empire

Re: Is art and music dying?

Post by Mirosurabu » September 6th, 2014, 1:22 pm

Why separate music from art? Music is an artform too.

I also fail to understand this topic. The logical outcome of understanding/knowledge/power (I want to emphasize: not only of science) is the complete annihilation of the universe (since the goal is to either understand the universe in its entirety or to become the universe itself.) Good thing: we will never reach this outcome. We can only come close to it.

User avatar
Skillz
Posts: 19
Joined: September 6th, 2014, 9:44 am
Favorite Philosopher: Tristan Tzara
Location: Missouri, USA

Re: Is art and music dying?

Post by Skillz » September 7th, 2014, 7:03 am

Mirosurabu wrote:Why separate music from art? Music is an artform too.

I also fail to understand this topic. The logical outcome of understanding/knowledge/power (I want to emphasize: not only of science) is the complete annihilation of the universe (since the goal is to either understand the universe in its entirety or to become the universe itself.) Good thing: we will never reach this outcome. We can only come close to it.
Agreed that music would be an unnecessary distinction from art in general. Would art still be useful as a means of conveying mystery or revealing mysteries? Doesn't seem like it. The degree of knowledge or power you describe is an unethical one.

Logic_ill
Posts: 1624
Joined: August 21st, 2012, 7:26 pm

Re: Is art and music dying?

Post by Logic_ill » September 7th, 2014, 7:22 am

I believe the arts will be there for us for many more years to come. I cannot imagine the sciences replacing it. The reason is that as soon as we are born or come into existence, a story begins to unfold for us. We have relationships and interact with people and our environment. The arts, depending on the artists, will try to convey these experiences through different mediums. Our experiences are in some way retold or related in our arts, and there may be no way around it but to identify or be entertained by such messages.

Not only that, modern life is permeated by the arts. I mean we are constantly being bombarded by different forms: films, ads, music, graphic arts, dance, etc. Even if we don't personally choose to be exposed to some form of art, we will be, because the people around us will have chosen it. Very few of us can go through life without having heard a song, or seen someone dancing, singing, playing and instrument, having seen a movie, a tv show, a book, read read or seem something artistic on the Internet, etc.

In that being a reality for almost everyone, they will inextricably link many of their own experiences with the arts, whether it is because they are a part of their memories or experiences and emotions are attached to them, or because they convey messages that appeal to them and they learn from, or because they create works of art themselves...

Our own lives, whether view it that way or not, (I do) are works of art. They are stories and we are the characters in them...:)

Art and music might die when we become extinct...

Note> The other day I was at a bar and saw a two year old girl dancing along to a music video she was watching. She had such rhythm and coordination that it almost seemed that she was born to do so...

Mer-monk
Posts: 7
Joined: September 6th, 2014, 8:12 pm

Re: Is art and music dying?

Post by Mer-monk » September 7th, 2014, 6:13 pm

Hi: Cogito ergo sum

I think that music is an art, it is not separable from art. Music is a mode of expression, which I would argue it bears a primordial role as the necessary/normal precursor of language. The child dolts on the rhythm of the mother's voice, its soothing melody encompassing her pleasure and the starkness of her admonishments, states of the soul communicated long before meaning.

Philosophy is about wisdom and science, it is about what is and how it is. These are different ways to talk about the same thing....as art, as a scientific object or as an ontological being. Each view adds to the existential totality of the object.

The more we understand about art, science or or philosophy, the more sensitive we are to the many nuances of a work of art and of any thing else. Emotively, the more we know, the more difficult it is to arouse our affective nature. We are jaded by our experience. But,in another sense, the more we know the more likely we are to see past the prima facie sensuality of the object of art to the core of what was consciously or unconsciously intended, what makes art--art.

User avatar
0laded
New Trial Member
Posts: 7
Joined: September 8th, 2014, 5:42 pm

Re: Is art and music dying?

Post by 0laded » September 8th, 2014, 7:48 pm

Present awareness wrote:As long as humans experience emotions, music and art will always have a place in our culture. If however, humans become completely logical, (Mr. Spock on Star Trek), then perhaps music and art will gradually die out.
I don't want to disrespect Mr Spock, but I don't think art is more emotion than it's perception (and its representation, and the perception of said representation, and so on).

And I ask, isn't Mr Spock logical yet partial, even if he holds all knowledge, for he is a particular recipient?

Whenever perception and mathematic formulae exist, music and art will live.

If only I could hear some quantum music...

Cogito ergo sum
Moderator
Posts: 174
Joined: June 11th, 2014, 2:32 am
Favorite Philosopher: Karl Popper

Re: Is art and music dying?

Post by Cogito ergo sum » September 30th, 2014, 12:25 am

Mer-monk wrote:Hi: Cogito ergo sum

I think that music is an art, it is not separable from art. Music is a mode of expression, which I would argue it bears a primordial role as the necessary/normal precursor of language. The child dolts on the rhythm of the mother's voice, its soothing melody encompassing her pleasure and the starkness of her admonishments, states of the soul communicated long before meaning.

Philosophy is about wisdom and science, it is about what is and how it is. These are different ways to talk about the same thing....as art, as a scientific object or as an ontological being. Each view adds to the existential totality of the object.

The more we understand about art, science or or philosophy, the more sensitive we are to the many nuances of a work of art and of any thing else. Emotively, the more we know, the more difficult it is to arouse our affective nature. We are jaded by our experience. But,in another sense, the more we know the more likely we are to see past the prima facie sensuality of the object of art to the core of what was consciously or unconsciously intended, what makes art--art.

The point is not to determine the difference between art and music. From here on, I will agree that art is music and vise versa. The reason why I asked this question is not to determine the difference between the forms of art, but what the purpose of art is. Do we enjoy art because it is pleasing to see and relate or make a connection to something? or is it a way to consolidate our emotions and feel them in the right place at the right time and in the right amount? It seems to me that the greater your understanding is the less relevant art is. It seems that the purpose of philosophical thought is to learn and understand the connections between two or more seemingly different objects and or forms and then translate that into your daily life. So from that point if through philosophical thought you can control emotions and feel them at the right place at the right time and in the right amount, then what would be the purpose of art? And when I say philosophical thought I mean that from a Socratic/Aristotelian view on philosophy, where it was a way to achieve enlightenment and a way to live your daily life.

User avatar
Theophane
Posts: 2347
Joined: May 25th, 2013, 9:03 am
Favorite Philosopher: C.S. Lewis
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Is art and music dying?

Post by Theophane » October 2nd, 2014, 2:56 pm

Skillz wrote:The logical outcome of science is a world devoid of mystery, but music and art, like dance, would still have a social function.
As humans become more machine-like, creativity and emotions are becoming more attenuated. A world devoid of mystery does seem to be the goal of science. But why would science arrange for its own death?

User avatar
Skillz
Posts: 19
Joined: September 6th, 2014, 9:44 am
Favorite Philosopher: Tristan Tzara
Location: Missouri, USA

Re: Is art and music dying?

Post by Skillz » October 2nd, 2014, 3:18 pm

Theophane wrote:
Skillz wrote:The logical outcome of science is a world devoid of mystery, but music and art, like dance, would still have a social function.
As humans become more machine-like, creativity and emotions are becoming more attenuated. A world devoid of mystery does seem to be the goal of science. But why would science arrange for its own death?

One does not need mystery to create. A creator does only what she has to do. Science is an indifferent non-mysterious method. And when that method is exhausted it becomes obsolete.

User avatar
Hereandnow
Posts: 1670
Joined: July 11th, 2012, 9:16 pm
Favorite Philosopher: the moon and the stars

Re: Is art and music dying?

Post by Hereandnow » October 4th, 2014, 10:52 am

Cogito ergo sum:

It seems to me that the greater your understanding is the less relevant art is. It seems that the purpose of philosophical thought is to learn and understand the connections between two or more seemingly different objects and or forms and then translate that into your daily life. So from that point if through philosophical thought you can control emotions and feel them at the right place at the right time and in the right amount, then what would be the purpose of art? And when I say philosophical thought I mean that from a Socratic/Aristotelian view on philosophy, where it was a way to achieve enlightenment and a way to live your daily life.
Why would you think art is simply a balance of emotions? 'Balance' possesses nothing of art in itself. Even if you were John Dewey, who thought getting your taxes in order was intrinsically aesthetic, you would not think art is exhausted by this. The aesthetic is the pleasing feeling that attends doing your taxes well. Artists are those who pursue this feeling for itself; they put themselves into problem solving interface with a physical medium, and art is "wrought out" of the experience. A concentrated form of what is part and parcel of meaningful experiences all the time. That's Dewey.

But simply put: When you're jamm'em to the tunes, your not just, well, keeping your affairs in order, and Van Gogh didn't paint to control his emotions. Artists pursue aesthetic rapture.

Post Reply