Is art and music dying?
-
- Posts: 174
- Joined: June 11th, 2014, 2:32 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Karl Popper
Is art and music dying?
- Present awareness
- Posts: 1389
- Joined: February 3rd, 2014, 7:02 pm
Re: Is art and music dying?
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.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.
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.
-
- Posts: 566
- Joined: August 3rd, 2014, 11:23 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Plato
- Location: Oregon, US
Re: Is art and music dying?
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.
"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.
-
- Posts: 1719
- Joined: February 23rd, 2012, 3:06 am
Re: Is art and music dying?
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.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?
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.
- Didge
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 4
- Joined: January 9th, 2014, 10:14 am
Re: Is art and music dying?
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.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.
- Skillz
- Posts: 19
- Joined: September 6th, 2014, 9:44 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Tristan Tzara
- Location: Missouri, USA
Re: Is art and music dying?
- Mirosurabu
- Posts: 26
- Joined: August 8th, 2013, 8:53 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Nietzsche
- Location: Roman Empire
Re: Is art and music dying?
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.
- Skillz
- Posts: 19
- Joined: September 6th, 2014, 9:44 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Tristan Tzara
- Location: Missouri, USA
Re: Is art and music dying?
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.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.
-
- Posts: 1624
- Joined: August 21st, 2012, 7:26 pm
Re: Is art and music dying?
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...
-
- Posts: 7
- Joined: September 6th, 2014, 8:12 pm
Re: Is art and music dying?
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.
- 0laded
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 7
- Joined: September 8th, 2014, 5:42 pm
Re: Is art and music dying?
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).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.
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...
-
- Posts: 174
- Joined: June 11th, 2014, 2:32 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Karl Popper
Re: Is art and music dying?
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.
- Theophane
- Posts: 2349
- Joined: May 25th, 2013, 9:03 am
- Favorite Philosopher: C.S. Lewis
- Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: Is art and music dying?
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?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.
- Skillz
- Posts: 19
- Joined: September 6th, 2014, 9:44 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Tristan Tzara
- Location: Missouri, USA
Re: Is art and music dying?
Theophane wrote: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?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.
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.
- Hereandnow
- Posts: 2839
- Joined: July 11th, 2012, 9:16 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: the moon and the stars
Re: Is art and music dying?
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.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.
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.
2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
2023 Philosophy Books of the Month
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
by Chet Shupe
March 2023