Philosophy of 💗 Love

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.
value
Premium Member
Posts: 750
Joined: December 11th, 2019, 9:18 am

Re: Philosophy of 💗 Love

Post by value »

Pattern-chaser wrote: June 2nd, 2023, 7:25 amWhat is the current enthusiasm to introduce AIs into every topic currently being discussed? Have I missed something? I agree that AIs are a matter we should discuss, but in every topic? I see no obvious philosophical connection between AI and all these topics.

I could understand it if the Subjective/Objective debate kept popping up. It does exist at the fundament of nearly every philosophical discussion. But AI doesn't, I don't think. So why are there AIs everywhere?
thrasymachus wrote: June 2nd, 2023, 10:25 am I suppose it can be helpful, but AI nothing novel or insightful to say and I find little more than recapitulations.
...
I think Kierkegaard was right in saying Hegel simply forgot that we exist! He wanted us to put down the book, and allow the world to "speak" what it is. Heidegger used the almost cliched term 'gelesenheit' to talk about this.
...
There is an argument.
Interesting and insightful responses ;) Yes, 'to put down the book' would be an argument that can be applicable when it concerns AI and I would agree with it.

The suggestion of AI was meant as a help-tool for study. As it enables to 'inquiry' into works it might facilitate unique new learning paths that are driven by the human's own topical curiosity which seems to result in an optimal learning condition. Of course it should be paired by actual reading of works.

To give an example. When Levinas started in his book Totality and Infinity to describe the concept Eschatology as the foundation for peace and respect I used AI to get insights into that concept relative to Levinas his philosophical works (all his works combined).

For example consider this question: How would Eschatology relate to Art from the perspective of Levinas?

It resulted in the answer that Levinas viewed art as an 'inhumanity' which was an interesting insight that I might never have obtained otherwise.

"Levinas's views on art are complex and sometimes contradictory. In his essay "Reality and Its Shadow," he criticizes art as being disengaged from ethical concerns. He argues that art is more concerned with the representation of reality than with the ethical relationship between the self and the other. Art, according to Levinas, is an "inhumanity" and an "inversion" of ethics. However, he also acknowledges the importance of artistic expression in conveying the ineffable and transcending the limits of language."

My first critical idea would be: what is true reality otherwise than an Other? (I've had this idea in the back of my mind to explore: why limit Levinas his idea to humans?) When an artist attempts to connect with (beauty in) true reality it seems to me to be the most ethical relationship with the self and the Other.

Could Levinas be wrong about art?

I then questioned further about my own idea that 'eschatological vision (as intended by Levinas, not the religious type, but a vision of beyond history or beyond the totality of the world) is the pure source of art and that it is love from the artist that is the source of the eschatological vision that results in true art and that the eschatological vision by which art is created enables viewers of that art to connect and establish an ethical relationship with the Other' (which is the idea that is mentioned in the OP based on the quote of Plato's vision on beauty) and whether Levinas might be wrong about art.

Corresponding idea of Plato (quoted in the OP): Beholding beauty with the eye of the mind, he will be enabled to bring forth, not images of beauty, but reality, and bringing forth and nourishing true virtue to become the friend of God.

The AI misinterpreted it a bit. My view is that the eschatological vision of the artist (that of beauty in reality) is the source of art. But its answer was none-the-less interesting.

"The appreciation of beauty in art can open one up to an eschatological reality, as seen in Tolkien's work. For many people, the encounter with beauty through art serves as the best introduction to heaven. It can be argued that the ethical aspect of love from the artist could be the source of eschatological vision in art.

While Levinas's philosophy does not directly address the idea that eschatological vision is required for art as its pure source, it does provide insights that suggest this could be possible. Love from the artist, particularly the ethical aspect of love, could be the source of the eschatological vision that results in art.
"

It costed about 10-15 minutes time and (in retro-perspective) it was truly an amazing learning experience with content that I might never have come across otherwise.

AI would not replace reading the works and 'putting down books' is certainly applicable but the example shows unique new learning abilities that are made possible by AI that might be exceptionally beneficial for the study of philosophy, especially for beginners en new students.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Philosophy of 💗 Love

Post by Pattern-chaser »

value wrote: June 3rd, 2023, 4:44 am The suggestion of AI was meant as a help-tool for study. As it enables to 'inquiry' into works it might facilitate unique new learning paths that are driven by the human's own topical curiosity which seems to result in an optimal learning condition. Of course it should be paired by actual reading of works.

[...]

AI would not replace reading the works and 'putting down books' is certainly applicable but the example shows unique new learning abilities that are made possible by AI that might be exceptionally beneficial for the study of philosophy, especially for beginners en new students.
It seems that the purpose its adherents currently suggest for AI is to do the research that was always such an intimate part of learning? Their access to an interweb full of data allows them to locate — by mechanical means, not by understanding — references that mention the subject(s) you are interested in. But the research we used to do, in libraries, back in the day, was part of the learning process. Along with the references we found, we encountered many others, and made connections that allowed learning that we would otherwise have missed. But, if we get the AIs to do all that for us, what is left for humans to do? [Even though, at the moment, we humans can do this much better than AIs can?]

I wonder if our current application of AIs is simply an effort to de-skill serious thought? 😮 [I'm not convinced that's possible, or useful, by the way.] Is that one direction your thoughts are taking you? It seems so, from my reading of your words, above?
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
thrasymachus
Posts: 520
Joined: March 7th, 2020, 11:21 am

Re: Philosophy of 💗 Love

Post by thrasymachus »

value wrote
Could Levinas be wrong about art?
He certainly could. I frankly couldn't believe it even as I read Reality and Its Shadow, but it would appear that Levinas was simply not endowed with an aesthetic mentality, meaning while he attended concerts, read literature, went to galleries, he did not understand the significance of these things. But then, he is a profound thinker, so I looked for a critical paper defending Levinas' position and I found "Levinas on Art and Aestheticism: Getting “Reality and its Shadow” Right" by Richard A Cohen. this paper was a response to Robert Eaglestone’s book of 1997 entitled Ethical Criticism: Reading After Levinas; and Jill Robbins’ book of 1999 entitled Altered Reading: Levinas and Literature, neither of which I had read, but I thought I could find their arguments in the Cohen paper, which I did.

In short, Levinas' argument is that art establishes an alternative to the world, an independent pseudo-reality that steals one away from the truth and the Real. Reality and It's Shadow is about this "shadow" world of art, describing art as a kind of Platonic mimesis of the actual world, but without the rationalist metaphysics. It is a magical indulgence that dulls and deflates worldly significant, and this undermines authentic ethical commitment and understanding. As I see it, the more one gets lost in a fantasy world of fiction, of an "opacity" of an image that mesmerizes, a musical escape, all of which is a kind of "doubling" of actuality in which what is created in art is produced out of the "originary", one loses genuine participation is living. Living becomes like the allegory with its classical animal stand ins, the fox rationalizing about unreachable grapes, and the like: Art places us in a world where we take the tale over the moral messaging. Art is an "escape" for one now lives in "an allegory of being" and this is simply not the world.

In defense of Levinas, he does have a point one that is especially relevant today, considering, say, that way the media keeps us entertained enough so we never ask serious questions about our existence, and of course, the ETHICS of our society and world. Levinas, Cohen reminds us, emphasizes the primacy of ethics in philosophy. He does appreciate art, but his whole point here is the way art can "totalize" and thereby eclipse a true understanding of the world. Art is NOT conceptual, the feel of it, the engagement IN it, getting absorbed in a play, or in Mona Lisa's endless theshold of a smile. And then what rushes to mind is the propaganda program the Nazis used. One might ask, are we not being propagandized ourselves, via the media that keeps our passions for truth and insight dulled with the constant engagement of music and movies?

One has to remember that Levinas is a phenomenologist, and he is therefore attempting to simply describe the world and the most basic level. He certainly is not saying art is bad or the aesthetic experience is bad. He just observes that this kind of thing tends to totalize our existence, and we descend into another reality where we don't have to be alert to the suffering of others. Of course, we note how indifferent we become to violence with the endless exposure to it for entertainment' sake. Even in the news: if you've seem one child with flies buzzing around the head and body, you've seen them all. Levinas is principally an ethicist, and insists on the direct confrontation with the "face" of suffering, for herein lies the metaphysical command. And he is right about this.
User avatar
thrasymachus
Posts: 520
Joined: March 7th, 2020, 11:21 am

Re: Philosophy of 💗 Love

Post by thrasymachus »

value wrote
AI would not replace reading the works and 'putting down books' is certainly applicable but the example shows unique new learning abilities that are made possible by AI that might be exceptionally beneficial for the study of philosophy, especially for beginners en new students.
i suppose. Definitely useful. But what I have wittnessed about ChatGBT is mostly its limitations: ask a question, but THEN ask it to explain what it means by this or that, I mean, make it explain itself, then you will get only explicit references to the data base. Nothing truly penetrating, insightful. AI doesn't "think" yet.

I think the possibilities of AI are the fascinating thing. One day it WILL think. And, one day, AI will discover and master the entire human genome, as well as a method of engineering DNA. And this will be consummatory for the human race.
value
Premium Member
Posts: 750
Joined: December 11th, 2019, 9:18 am

Re: Philosophy of 💗 Love

Post by value »

thrasymachus wrote: June 9th, 2023, 10:40 am
value wrote
AI would not replace reading the works and 'putting down books' is certainly applicable but the example shows unique new learning abilities that are made possible by AI that might be exceptionally beneficial for the study of philosophy, especially for beginners en new students.
i suppose. Definitely useful. But what I have wittnessed about ChatGBT is mostly its limitations: ask a question, but THEN ask it to explain what it means by this or that, I mean, make it explain itself, then you will get only explicit references to the data base. Nothing truly penetrating, insightful. AI doesn't "think" yet.

I think the possibilities of AI are the fascinating thing. One day it WILL think. And, one day, AI will discover and master the entire human genome, as well as a method of engineering DNA. And this will be consummatory for the human race.
I have always found that the idea that the human is programmed with DNA to be invalid. In my opinion the Other of Levinas is the origin of existence and it is that beginning-less other that resides and manifests within the complex coherence of genes. Top-down control of DNA by AI does not seem to be a favourable situation for advancement of the human race. It is respect for the Other that is fundamentally required to secure optimal evolution.

I recently commented the following to African pro-GMO campaigners: "good cannot come from what's already there as if empirical greed got it there. good comes from within."
value
Premium Member
Posts: 750
Joined: December 11th, 2019, 9:18 am

Re: Philosophy of 💗 Love

Post by value »

Pattern-chaser wrote: June 3rd, 2023, 9:02 am
value wrote: June 3rd, 2023, 4:44 am The suggestion of AI was meant as a help-tool for study. As it enables to 'inquiry' into works it might facilitate unique new learning paths that are driven by the human's own topical curiosity which seems to result in an optimal learning condition. Of course it should be paired by actual reading of works.

[...]

AI would not replace reading the works and 'putting down books' is certainly applicable but the example shows unique new learning abilities that are made possible by AI that might be exceptionally beneficial for the study of philosophy, especially for beginners en new students.
It seems that the purpose its adherents currently suggest for AI is to do the research that was always such an intimate part of learning? Their access to an interweb full of data allows them to locate — by mechanical means, not by understanding — references that mention the subject(s) you are interested in. But the research we used to do, in libraries, back in the day, was part of the learning process. Along with the references we found, we encountered many others, and made connections that allowed learning that we would otherwise have missed. But, if we get the AIs to do all that for us, what is left for humans to do? [Even though, at the moment, we humans can do this much better than AIs can?]

I wonder if our current application of AIs is simply an effort to de-skill serious thought? 😮 [I'm not convinced that's possible, or useful, by the way.] Is that one direction your thoughts are taking you? It seems so, from my reading of your words, above?
Perhaps you are right that the reading of books is a vital part of learning. However, my argument would be that thought requires content and that AI makes that content easier to reach. It could be nice to have thousands of books within a few seconds reach for any type of 'innovative' inquiry. Also, AI could be used alongside the reading of books to instantly explore new learned concepts in-depth through inquiry which could improve the learning experience provided by books.
value
Premium Member
Posts: 750
Joined: December 11th, 2019, 9:18 am

Re: Philosophy of 💗 Love

Post by value »

thrasymachus wrote: June 9th, 2023, 10:15 am
value wrote
Could Levinas be wrong about art?
He certainly could. I frankly couldn't believe it even as I read Reality and Its Shadow, but it would appear that Levinas was simply not endowed with an aesthetic mentality, meaning while he attended concerts, read literature, went to galleries, he did not understand the significance of these things. But then, he is a profound thinker, so I looked for a critical paper defending Levinas' position and I found "Levinas on Art and Aestheticism: Getting “Reality and its Shadow” Right" by Richard A Cohen. this paper was a response to Robert Eaglestone’s book of 1997 entitled Ethical Criticism: Reading After Levinas; and Jill Robbins’ book of 1999 entitled Altered Reading: Levinas and Literature, neither of which I had read, but I thought I could find their arguments in the Cohen paper, which I did.

In short, Levinas' argument is that art establishes an alternative to the world, an independent pseudo-reality that steals one away from the truth and the Real. Reality and It's Shadow is about this "shadow" world of art, describing art as a kind of Platonic mimesis of the actual world, but without the rationalist metaphysics. It is a magical indulgence that dulls and deflates worldly significant, and this undermines authentic ethical commitment and understanding. As I see it, the more one gets lost in a fantasy world of fiction, of an "opacity" of an image that mesmerizes, a musical escape, all of which is a kind of "doubling" of actuality in which what is created in art is produced out of the "originary", one loses genuine participation is living. Living becomes like the allegory with its classical animal stand ins, the fox rationalizing about unreachable grapes, and the like: Art places us in a world where we take the tale over the moral messaging. Art is an "escape" for one now lives in "an allegory of being" and this is simply not the world.

In defense of Levinas, he does have a point one that is especially relevant today, considering, say, that way the media keeps us entertained enough so we never ask serious questions about our existence, and of course, the ETHICS of our society and world. Levinas, Cohen reminds us, emphasizes the primacy of ethics in philosophy. He does appreciate art, but his whole point here is the way art can "totalize" and thereby eclipse a true understanding of the world. Art is NOT conceptual, the feel of it, the engagement IN it, getting absorbed in a play, or in Mona Lisa's endless theshold of a smile. And then what rushes to mind is the propaganda program the Nazis used. One might ask, are we not being propagandized ourselves, via the media that keeps our passions for truth and insight dulled with the constant engagement of music and movies?

One has to remember that Levinas is a phenomenologist, and he is therefore attempting to simply describe the world and the most basic level. He certainly is not saying art is bad or the aesthetic experience is bad. He just observes that this kind of thing tends to totalize our existence, and we descend into another reality where we don't have to be alert to the suffering of others. Of course, we note how indifferent we become to violence with the endless exposure to it for entertainment' sake. Even in the news: if you've seem one child with flies buzzing around the head and body, you've seen them all. Levinas is principally an ethicist, and insists on the direct confrontation with the "face" of suffering, for herein lies the metaphysical command. And he is right about this.
Perhaps there is validity in his perspective on art relative to ethics but my first idea would be that it would concern the image form of art and not the experience of art. The experience of art involves both the creation process and the viewing process which in my opinion could be ethical of nature when the purpose is to incite an eschatological vision of beauty.

I would have to read more about Levinas his perspective. It is on the read list. Your answer is very insightful!
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Philosophy of 💗 Love

Post by Pattern-chaser »

value wrote: June 9th, 2023, 5:24 pm Perhaps you are right that the reading of books is a vital part of learning.
Yes, not forgetting that learning is also possible by reading from a screen, instead of pulverised dead trees.


value wrote: June 9th, 2023, 5:24 pm However, my argument would be that thought requires content and that AI makes that content easier to reach. It could be nice to have thousands of books within a few seconds reach for any type of 'innovative' inquiry.
This is already reality. Are you aware of the modern proverb, "Google is your friend"? [Those who prefer not to be tracked may use ixquick.com instead.]
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
thrasymachus
Posts: 520
Joined: March 7th, 2020, 11:21 am

Re: Philosophy of 💗 Love

Post by thrasymachus »

value wrote
I have always found that the idea that the human is programmed with DNA to be invalid. In my opinion the Other of Levinas is the origin of existence and it is that beginning-less other that resides and manifests within the complex coherence of genes. Top-down control of DNA by AI does not seem to be a favourable situation for advancement of the human race. It is respect for the Other that is fundamentally required to secure optimal evolution.
Not control by DNA at all. Keep in mind that freedom in this vein of thought is only as good as the cultural setting that defines the nature of the moral issues one encounters. The face of the Other is an absolute call to duty, but the general conditions that give rise to the problems in which the Face is found are contingent. It is that I see a great deal of what ails us (and the Face, or better, the hidden face, behind the "quiet desperation" of the reposed face encountered) is our hard wired physical and psychological frailties, as well as their concomitant social inadequacies grounded therein. Social success entails a broad range of talents and abilities and it is possible to quantify, somehow, this genetically, that is, determine in detail the complexity of genetic coding that makes for a great musician or orator, and so forth. AI carries this possibility as it exceeds our ability to quantify. I am certainly no expert, but it seems reasonable speculation that one day AI will be able to quantify the entire human genome, matching genotype and phenotype. Not to say there is a "one-to-one deterministic relationship between genes and traits," but only that this is a problem very actively pursued in the field.

I imagine a social environment in which people are not frustrated by their own inadequacies will be one in which one can flourish free of the anxieties of rejection and failure. Something like that.
I recently commented the following to African pro-GMO campaigners: "good cannot come from what's already there as if empirical greed got it there. good comes from within."
I agree with this, keeping in mind that this is a "good will" we are talking about. And what is a good will? Certainly Kant had a piece of it: duty, but rationally conceived. He imagined us to be disembodied rational agencies, and if one actually desires to do something right, it doesn't qualify as a moral action. One has to not want to do it. It has to be an imposition and your action is a sacrifice of more or less magnitude. There is something right about this insisting that morality and duty requires selflessness, turning away from what one desires to consider the wants and needs of Others. Our reason is grounded transcendentally, making reason a kind of source for divine will.

I can see where Levinas gets his views on art in this, because for Levinas, given that ethics is first philosophy, our response to the face of the Other is always an imposition on our Totality, and this totality is the our worldy Being and its egoic structure that is, as Heidegger put it, centered on me and "mineness". We are self creating, Heidegger says, and our being here is a temporal creative endeavor of self making. Levinas wants to pull away from this self centeredness toward a moral priority of the Other that stands metaphysically outside of this egoic production. This takes discipline and selflessness. A moral act is to go beyond what we want, and toward the welfare of the Other that is transcendental (meaning, out there, not me, and not reducible to a familiar category). Art can be seen as a realizing of desire within one's Totality, at war, says Levinas, with our metaphysical obligation in the Other.

Ahh, but consider the more fundamental thesis that inquires about the very nature of the response to the face of the other; it is my response, and if this response is wholly out of rationally conceived duty, there is no motivation at all. Kant didn't see this, and I think Levinas didn't either: there is no escaping affectivity in ethics as duty requires the desire to do good, and the good will must be a will of compassion and empathy, and these are the very opposite of disinterestedness.

In other words, compassion is MY compassion FOR anOther. One might even say, and I think this is right, that the moral inclination is inherently aesthetic, for feeling and conscience are aligned with beauty, love, happiness and their sublimity.

I still have a lot of work to do to understand Levinas.
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of the Arts and Philosophy in the Arts”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021