3 ms·
I think people who don't consider it being art do not understand that part of the art is the interpretation that happens in the spectator's mind. Dan Dennett h
by js8 8y ago
I think people who don't consider it being art do not understand that part of the art is the interpretation that happens in the spectator's mind.
Dan Dennett has a beautiful example in his talk on consciousness (https://www.ted.com/talks/dan_dennett_on_our_consciousness/transcript https://www.ted.com/talks/dan_dennett_on_our_consciousness/t...), where he talks about the Bellotto's painting.
"But, more importantly, I cringe at the idea that randomness leads to discovery or spontaneity or human approachableness."
I am not sure I completely agree with that. See this presentation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXQPL9GooyI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXQPL9GooyI
- dahart 8y agoThanks for the video, I’ll watch it later this morning. It’s totally okay to disagree with me, but FWIW, there’s a big difference in my mind between arbitrary and random, or between accident and random, or between discovery and random. A uniform random variable has an expected value, a guaranteed average, and known bounds, so to frame it according to that video, using a random number generator is designed and planned, and it won’t lead to anything happening that you didn’t expect. You can’t predict each instance, but you can predict the behavior. So I’m saying I already buy the title of that video (“Why greatness can’t be planned”) but I don’t think rand() is a vehicle to get you there.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]