You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

J

Comments

Good, so we need to consider context. But is your example literally possible? I noted this earlier in the thread, but it's worth repeating: If "someon...
July 27, 2025 at 12:45
Are you proposing this as context-free? Or does the object need to be presented in some way as to invite such a response? If so, what might be the con...
July 26, 2025 at 13:13
Actually, I'm trying to get an OP together that might be a better place. Let's hold off till then -- thanks!
July 24, 2025 at 18:22
If a work is not emotionally moving it is absolutely not art. There is no exception. — I like sushi There has to be a line drawn somewhere, — I like s...
July 24, 2025 at 12:04
I can see it that way. "Pragmatic" can be understood in a variety of senses. This is really interesting to me. I'm going to try to write an OP that wi...
July 23, 2025 at 20:57
Yes, roughly. Is it appropriate for me to ask into some specifics? (You don't have to pursue this with me if it's a pain in the neck.) I'll take "curr...
July 23, 2025 at 12:28
Concerning purposes involving other people, I agree that most art doesn't have to be understood that way, though many artists value communication as a...
July 22, 2025 at 22:45
So do you have a story, or explanation, for what happened to (so-called, in your view) art in the 20th century? Why were the lines not drawn where you...
July 22, 2025 at 17:45
I would likely have the same reaction, if I saw this work. But are you open to the idea that emotional response is not criteriological? That objects a...
July 22, 2025 at 16:09
That sounds to me like a new type of art! But I know what you mean. Interestingly, Danto talked a lot in his later writings about art within a particu...
July 22, 2025 at 12:59
Yes, this is insightful on Duchamp's part. As you say, this sounds like a good expansion of the "artworld" idea. There's room to include the artist th...
July 21, 2025 at 22:45
Sure. It's not a "Pop-Mech" kind of question, and we can do science for most practical purposes without having to engage with it.
July 21, 2025 at 19:14
This is a great exposition of how and why Fountain was first seen as non-art. Watching how the conversation has evolved on this thread, I want to add ...
July 21, 2025 at 17:01
Good point. What should we say, then? You go on to note Perhaps that's good enough; the distinction isn't clear, usage-wise, and it's no wonder people...
July 20, 2025 at 19:06
Is it still art if no one sees it that way (except the creator)? Should we say, "intentionally attempts to create art"? Also, the verb "create" is ver...
July 20, 2025 at 12:06
Thanks for responding. I'm having great difficulty following your thoughts, however. Could you perhaps just begin by saying what you think Williams' p...
July 20, 2025 at 11:46
In: Assertion  — view comment
I hope you do -- always interested in your thoughts. And about the ontology of chatbots as well.
July 20, 2025 at 11:42
Yes, this is right. I was implicitly importing my idea of which "artworld" would be appropriate in a discussion about a possibly-museum-worthy paintin...
July 19, 2025 at 23:23
If either of these things happened just as described, it would be vandalism, not art, and the person would presumably be arrested. :smile: Seriously, ...
July 19, 2025 at 19:27
In: Assertion  — view comment
The letter you quote from makes an excellent case for why computer programs are not agents in anything like the sense a human is. Do you agree that we...
July 19, 2025 at 16:13
Do you mean, they would not be from our point of view, or from the point of view of an Absolute Conception that claims to be able to give an explanati...
July 19, 2025 at 13:18
In: Assertion  — view comment
Really interesting and helpful, thanks. Couple of thoughts: I agree with you, as it happens, about personhood here, but we have to recognize that many...
July 19, 2025 at 13:09
In: Assertion  — view comment
But as we've been discussing, we don't need an absolute scale in order to compare good and better. I'm saying that a literal interpretation of, e.g., ...
July 19, 2025 at 01:06
In: Assertion  — view comment
And that what we started with is the key to such an interpretation. I know you're doubtful whether there could be a useful interpretation of holy book...
July 18, 2025 at 23:07
In: Assertion  — view comment
Oh, that. Originalism. What the Framers intended. A bit like a literal reading of the Bible.
July 18, 2025 at 22:55
This is a great question, IMO. I'll go out on a limb and say that nothing very interesting can be said about aesthetics without locating what you're s...
July 18, 2025 at 22:08
Yes, because here we have a question about the actual composition of the object, which Danto showed was not the question concerning art tout court. I ...
July 18, 2025 at 22:00
In: Assertion  — view comment
Which particular piece of poltroonery do you have in mind? Corporations as persons?
July 18, 2025 at 21:57
In: Assertion  — view comment
Yes, that needs to remain clear. You read a poem; you derive a meaning; it may or may not be what the poet intended, though it's often reasonable to i...
July 18, 2025 at 21:50
In: Assertion  — view comment
Right, but it's still an assertion even if the speaker is mistaken.
July 18, 2025 at 21:37
In: Assertion  — view comment
Ah, but then you don't actually "see the cat on the mat" . . . my avatar is a digital entity, to put it generously. Which doesn't mean you haven't ass...
July 18, 2025 at 21:15
In: Assertion  — view comment
My 2 cents -- and @"Hanover" may see it differently -- is that by putting it this way, we're succumbing to the illusion that "an LLM" could have any s...
July 18, 2025 at 21:03
In: Assertion  — view comment
Good. Just out of curiosity, has it been shown that an AI program can pass the Turing Test? The examples of bot-talk that I've seen cited in TPF would...
July 18, 2025 at 15:13
At one point, that was accurate. But the technology rapidly advanced so that what is now presented in a photograph is as open to question as what a pa...
July 18, 2025 at 14:28
In: Assertion  — view comment
I see your point. It's a tough nut. Do we need to try to find some limit cases where we could speak of a programmer "intentionally" doing something vi...
July 18, 2025 at 14:23
Brilliant.
July 18, 2025 at 13:42
In: Assertion  — view comment
Yes, this is all fine, though "black box" might be overemphasizing the inscrutability. That's why the Chatbot example seems relevant. We do not have t...
July 18, 2025 at 13:40
In: Assertion  — view comment
Nor does it imply that there aren't cases where speaker intent is very important. I think the Chatbot example is such a case. The program itself can't...
July 18, 2025 at 12:38
More defensible is, "If we say it is art, then it is art," which can also open up interesting conversations about who is included in "we." "What art i...
July 18, 2025 at 12:19
We're all saying the same thing here. So the interesting question is, What are those stories? What are those circumstances? How do they vary from era ...
July 18, 2025 at 00:28
I'm going to say Yes, but the next question is, "What makes a painting art?" As you say, why isn't a "painting" that covers my walls with white paint,...
July 17, 2025 at 23:12
Again, your responses are thoughtful, on point, and help develop the questions of the OP. Much appreciated. Right. And we have to hold out against tho...
July 17, 2025 at 16:35
This is good. I think we forget, because the phrase is now part of the atmosphere, that "The View from Nowhere" was undoubtedly intended to sound absu...
July 17, 2025 at 15:52
:party: At the risk of jeopardizing our accord, I do need to clarify that I'm using "analysis" to mean something like conceptual analysis and its logi...
July 17, 2025 at 00:48
Nah, just had to return to real life for a while. But I wanted to be sure to acknowledge my mistake first. Precision is a focus here, for sure. But no...
July 17, 2025 at 00:29
You're absolutely right, I did, as in "devote itself to" -- a slightly different meaning, but my apologies for not remembering.
July 17, 2025 at 00:02
I think the Williamson essay is itself a good example, though I suppose some would dispute its rigor. Or for a broader example, Thomas Nagel's work is...
July 16, 2025 at 22:42
Out of curiosity, what do you take Williams' position to be on the question of the Absolute Conception? Could you set it out in Williams' terms, rathe...
July 16, 2025 at 19:59
Yes. Though it needn't. Yes.
July 16, 2025 at 19:55
Of course you were. This is the dark, problematic side of scientism. I don't know how we'd settle the question of whose "intuitiveness" we're talking ...
July 16, 2025 at 19:53