4 ms·
With the risk of coming across as vapid, I believe that a more profound and possibly undermining insight here is that "appearance" is itself an implicit experie
by gmaster1440 6y ago
With the risk of coming across as vapid, I believe that a more profound and possibly undermining insight here is that "appearance" is itself an implicit experience of it, meaning that you can't really escape experience or consider something as truly decoupled from experiencing it.
With that, "Appearances vs. Experiences" becomes more of a false dichotomy, an argument that privileges certain experiences over others, which is fine, but possibly less effective.
- arrosenberg 6y agoYou definitely can decouple it. Go to any major National Park in the US or Canada and you will see people who get out of a luxury bus or car, snap 3 pictures and get back in to go to the next scene. To some extent experience is in the eye of the beholder, but I feel pretty good about judging those people as not really experiencing what they came to see.
- gmaster1440 6y agoFair enough, in your example the tourists who simply take a photo are definitely not getting the same kind of experience as those who choose to go on hikes. I do feel that fits nicely into my argument, which is that we can compare photo opportunity and hiking as two different kinds of experiences, instead of treating one as an appearance vs another as an actual experience. In the end, it's at least possible that the tourists that only took a photo have derived as much personal pleasure and satisfaction as those who invested more time into activities such as hiking, depending on their personalities, interests, and intentions.