5 ms·

I assume the point of physics is to understand nature and communicate that understanding to others, who will need sufficient interest and background knowledge t

• beat 11y ago
  As someone who speaks both art and computers, I can assure you that it's at least as rigorous and significant as, say, the startup community's language. The problem with trying to make a counterexample of hard science is that you're opening up to excluding every subject that isn't hard science to the same criticism. The purpose of the language of art theory and criticism isn't to communicate objective truth, because it's subjective truth. But just because a truth is subjective does not make it less real, or less meaningful. Generally, we are limited to the subjective reality of our perceptions. Art theory is the study of perceptions, and a great deal of modern art is more or less experimenting with perception itself. Knocking it as "bollocks" because it's not expressed in formal logic or mathematics is both subjective and non-rigorous. Or, as the Dude would say, "That's just, like, your opinion, man." If you don't understand the language, that's fine, and if you don't care to understand it, that's fine too, but calling it bollocks without understanding or caring to understand it is itself bollocks. If you start digging around in philosophy, there's a strong argument within phenomenology that physics itself is subjective. Rigorous language doesn't mean the subject of the language is objective. Godel demonstrated the limits of language against objective nature in his incompleteness theorem as well (basically, Godel proved that, within any system, there are statements that are true that cannot be proven). But I digress.
  • deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  • anthay 11y ago
    I do have that hostility to art criticism of which you speak, which is what prompted me to post. I know nothing about art, so I should have kept my mouth shut, or at least been less insulting. Sorry. When I read a story, hear a song or watch a movie and I might _feel_ something or my world-view may have been moved. But I look at a painting or sculpture and I feel nothing. It doesn’t feel right that a critic has to explain to me that my perception is being experimented with.
    • beat 11y ago
      The need to explain it is one of the curses of modern art. I'm in the camp where I think it should be able to move you without explanation. But there's nothing wrong with not feeling moved by a particular kind of art, or by being irritated when it has to be explained to you. Art is also cultural, in the sense that only members of the culture really grok a piece of art. If you're an American, you naturally understand cowboy movies. But samurai films, which are in many ways the same thing, may feel strange to you. Most art is made only for people culturally similar to the artist. This includes fine art and modern art. If you aren't part of the modern art culture, you'll never get it, any more than if you're not Japanese you'll never understand eating natto (ugh, disgusting stuff, to even my openminded and educated American palate). Ultimately, though, we're all moved by things that feel personal to us. I've spent probably several hours in total just staring at a particular Jackson Pollock painting (Mural, University of Iowa collection). It's a profoundly emotional experience for me. You'd probably see a bunch of green, yellow, and black stripes and blobs. That's okay. That's how most people feel about it. That doesn't mean you're dumb, and it doesn't mean I'm pretentious. It just means we're different people, with different motivations. Universal art is usually dull art.
• mcphage 11y ago
  > I can't help feeling that art language is deliberately obscure and elitist and its purpose is not designed to communicate objective truth because there is no objective truth to communicate. Perhaps the emperor does have clothes and I'm just too ignorant to see them. Do you spend much time studying art, or reading art criticism? If not: well then, there's your answer.
  • anthay 11y ago
    You are right, I am articulating an ill-formed feeling, probably based on my ignorance of the subject.