Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1548545500 Timestamp) THE SELF-REGULATION OF THE ARTS –Art is a way of making an idea real (open to experience). Art is the demonstrated property of an artist. Art is governed by established rules and principles and demonstrates an observance of limits on what is permitted or appropriate.”—Spencer Young This is .. really good structure. Rarely good structure. Pls let me suggest a tweak to your thought process a bit, and to riff off this opportunity to educate others: –“…governed by…”— This phrase is an analogy, not a description. Is art ‘governed?’. No. The process of regulation is much more elegant than that.

    • There exist economic costs of the production of different art forms.
    • There exist civilizations capable of paying the costs of different art forms (or not).
    • There exist technologies within each craft as well as the craft of aesthetics.
    • There exists symbolic content and aesthetic composition that ‘brands’ periods (states of development).
    • There exists mastery of the craft, the aesthetics, and the informational(symbolic) content.
    • There exists a tradition in all of the above (market).
    • There exists imitation that causes that tradition(market).
    • There are canons (reference works) that reinforce imitation and tradition (standards of weights and measures);
    • There is a market for imitation, canons, and the art itself.

    This is one of those deceptively hard questions of art theory. As far as I know, art is an ancient, even eternal, self-regulating market that ‘demonstrates demand for art works within both current and traditional limits of craftsmanship, aesthetics, meaning, context of display, and morals/ethics/manners (appropriateness).” There is plenty of ‘market manipulation’ in the arts, and it has been so forever. Just like every other market. However, professionals are rarely fooled. And tradition of the heroic value of arts continues unabated. (thanks for letting me riff with this)

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1548545712 Timestamp) I prefer ORDER. (intolerance). I would rather live in a prussian order with limited means of signaling (greater equality of responsibility for the commons.) I have come to understand that monarchies are better at the production of aesthetic commons, the generals better judges of war; the middle class at commercial commons; and the lower class at insurance commons. I would prefer we only let people engage in the production of commons they are good at. And that they have ‘skin in the game’ for any commons that they produce.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1548545500 Timestamp) THE SELF-REGULATION OF THE ARTS –Art is a way of making an idea real (open to experience). Art is the demonstrated property of an artist. Art is governed by established rules and principles and demonstrates an observance of limits on what is permitted or appropriate.”—Spencer Young This is .. really good structure. Rarely good structure. Pls let me suggest a tweak to your thought process a bit, and to riff off this opportunity to educate others: –“…governed by…”— This phrase is an analogy, not a description. Is art ‘governed?’. No. The process of regulation is much more elegant than that.

    • There exist economic costs of the production of different art forms.
    • There exist civilizations capable of paying the costs of different art forms (or not).
    • There exist technologies within each craft as well as the craft of aesthetics.
    • There exists symbolic content and aesthetic composition that ‘brands’ periods (states of development).
    • There exists mastery of the craft, the aesthetics, and the informational(symbolic) content.
    • There exists a tradition in all of the above (market).
    • There exists imitation that causes that tradition(market).
    • There are canons (reference works) that reinforce imitation and tradition (standards of weights and measures);
    • There is a market for imitation, canons, and the art itself.

    This is one of those deceptively hard questions of art theory. As far as I know, art is an ancient, even eternal, self-regulating market that ‘demonstrates demand for art works within both current and traditional limits of craftsmanship, aesthetics, meaning, context of display, and morals/ethics/manners (appropriateness).” There is plenty of ‘market manipulation’ in the arts, and it has been so forever. Just like every other market. However, professionals are rarely fooled. And tradition of the heroic value of arts continues unabated. (thanks for letting me riff with this)

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1548679656 Timestamp) THE “ENTIRELY REASONABLE” UTILITY OF MATHEMATICS —“…Russell and Frege …”– Sorry but mathematics is so useful because it consists of precisely one constant relation: position, for which we have invented a naming scheme of positional names. Therefore every reference in any set of constant relations of any scale, at any scale, can be named (in as many as n-dimensions), and with that name all other relations ascertainable. Mathematics consists of the assignment of, and operations upon, positional names names, and the various techniques for constructing or deducing constant relations with others names. The unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics is nothing more than its dependence upon a single immutable constant relation: positional name. This simplicity makes the error to which all other names (other logics) are subject effectively impossible, and limits error to errors of operation and deduction.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1548679656 Timestamp) THE “ENTIRELY REASONABLE” UTILITY OF MATHEMATICS —“…Russell and Frege …”– Sorry but mathematics is so useful because it consists of precisely one constant relation: position, for which we have invented a naming scheme of positional names. Therefore every reference in any set of constant relations of any scale, at any scale, can be named (in as many as n-dimensions), and with that name all other relations ascertainable. Mathematics consists of the assignment of, and operations upon, positional names names, and the various techniques for constructing or deducing constant relations with others names. The unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics is nothing more than its dependence upon a single immutable constant relation: positional name. This simplicity makes the error to which all other names (other logics) are subject effectively impossible, and limits error to errors of operation and deduction.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1548678844 Timestamp) THAT THING WE CALL ‘LOGIC” We can observe our use of logic, math, geometry, just fine, the way we can observe every other one of our senses. But, until the present era would could not inspect the mechanism by which logic, math, geometry function: the detection of differences in constant relations between recursive neural networks. In other words, we lacked instrumentation for observation and measurement at such scales, and a paradigm (logic) for modeling them instrumental (computer science). it also is the most complex phenomenon we have examined which, because it’s heuristic (adaptive). But the fundamentally ability of us to sense differences, particularly in something so informationally dense (concentrated) as speech, is produced by differences in degree and distribution of excitement of neural networks. In other words we sense both constant and inconstant relations, in what babbage correctly called ‘a difference engine’. The logical facility consists in our ability to detect differences in constant relations between a nearly infinite hierarchy of forever-contingent associations. The discipline we call logic attempts to tests whether we ‘speak’ in constant relations. The discipline of formal logic attempts to produce a grammar of categories of constant relations in an effort to test for inconstant relations, claimed to be constant. —“Long before the twentieth century the prevailing opinion was that Euclidean geometry, standard mathematics, and logic did not rest on experience in any obvious way. They were largely presupposed in our empirical work, and it was difficult to see what if anything might disconfirm them. Geometry was a special case and might be handled in different ways that we shall not discuss here. That leaves logic and mathematics.”—S.E.P.

    • Curt

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1548678844 Timestamp) THAT THING WE CALL ‘LOGIC” We can observe our use of logic, math, geometry, just fine, the way we can observe every other one of our senses. But, until the present era would could not inspect the mechanism by which logic, math, geometry function: the detection of differences in constant relations between recursive neural networks. In other words, we lacked instrumentation for observation and measurement at such scales, and a paradigm (logic) for modeling them instrumental (computer science). it also is the most complex phenomenon we have examined which, because it’s heuristic (adaptive). But the fundamentally ability of us to sense differences, particularly in something so informationally dense (concentrated) as speech, is produced by differences in degree and distribution of excitement of neural networks. In other words we sense both constant and inconstant relations, in what babbage correctly called ‘a difference engine’. The logical facility consists in our ability to detect differences in constant relations between a nearly infinite hierarchy of forever-contingent associations. The discipline we call logic attempts to tests whether we ‘speak’ in constant relations. The discipline of formal logic attempts to produce a grammar of categories of constant relations in an effort to test for inconstant relations, claimed to be constant. —“Long before the twentieth century the prevailing opinion was that Euclidean geometry, standard mathematics, and logic did not rest on experience in any obvious way. They were largely presupposed in our empirical work, and it was difficult to see what if anything might disconfirm them. Geometry was a special case and might be handled in different ways that we shall not discuss here. That leaves logic and mathematics.”—S.E.P.

    • Curt

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1548818179 Timestamp) —“CURT: QUESTION: THE ECONOMICS OF THE PERCEPTION OF ART?”— Could you recommend any works on Art Theory? I have been looking a bit into Rand’s Romantic Manifesto. (CD: honestly – and this will surprise people – as far as I know (and I know) there aren’t any better. My work is an extension of the RM. And honestly it’s the best most important piece she wrote and in my opinion the only piece with long term value. It influenced me greatly. If you add Gary Becker’s economic analysis of art I think you get the rest of it.) It seems the absence of art (silence, non-action) achieves non-imposition of costs whereas the act of art always imposes costs. (CD: I would say is broken into two statements. 1- Markets require attention seeking – that is how we reduce opportunity costs: density of opportunity and density of attention opportunities. 2- Some commons offer aesthetic attention seeking as an alternative to ‘unordered’, wild or unmaintained, commons. A well manicured park with statues of men of arts and letters is a pretty good place to be. 3- Not all commons are available for attention seeking, or attention-drawing, – and in fact that is what ‘sacred’ means. 4- Not all people possess the ability and training to respect sacred spaces, and they must be protected from such people.) Are all actions of an individual considered art? – No. (CD: I would say that art consists of that which the actor intends to invest in obtaining attention by the expenditure of resources for the provision of aesthetic returns. in other words, we choose to invest in the aesthetics of any given craft (making) for the purpose of attention to the decoration of mind, time and space in all that term’s possible meanings.) Who defines what is art and what is not? – Consumers, viewers, participants. (CD: Um, I would say no, that art is what it is across the spectrum of childish to amateurish, to professional, to iconic, to revolutionary. I would say that craft, design, editorial, and art are very different things. i would say some people engage in fraud that takes advantage of consumer ignorance, and that the value of art is determined by long term market forces (what survives the competition between fashion and ignorance). (CD: many goods are brought to market, those that survive in the market survive, those that don’t do not. What is an attempt at art is defined above. what succeeds at art is determined by a series of markets, the most common of which is REFERENCE BY OTHER ARTIST: by imitation. Art is worthy of perception. – Perception costs are time and energy. (CD: the market determines whether it is worthy of perception, most art is not worthy of perception just like most products are not worthy of consumption. The difference is that it is easier to find a sucker for bad art than it is to find a sucker for a bad car, and far harder to find a sucker for a poorly tailored bit of clothing.) Are all actions of an individual considered art? – No. Who defines what is art and what is not? Consumers, viewers, participants. Art is worthy of perception. Perception costs are time and labor. (CD: We would use a slighting different set of terms I suggest you adopt: Art competes for attention. Attention is a resource, consisting of time and energy. The returns on attention are either there, or they are not. Given that the returns vary from the free association the art causes for the individual, for people who see his possession of it, for public use, and for public ceremonial use, the chances of providing that return are highly dependent upon the craft, design, content, scale, of the piece. What you put in your bathroom, your guest bath, your living room, your office, a court building, and a church hold different standards.) Viewers perceive, recognize and set value on something. Perception and recognition cost time and labor. Similar to how consumers set prices. An act of art doesn’t exist because its up to it is a viewer value judgement. (CD: Hmmmm. Art is a product like any other. Books are a product like any other. tools are products like any other. You must undrestand the language and context of the book to buy and use it for returns. You must understand the possible operations and context of use of a tool to buy and use it for returns. ) (CD: the problem in your reasoning is as usual one of grammar. People create products. Those products serve a function or not (satisfy a market demand). Those products serve sufficient market demands to sell or not (provide marginal value necessary for incentive to exchange). Those exchanges(investments) survive the market for aesthetic competition over time, for the intended market whether individual, group, polity, world). Here is what you might be searching for: Public art of any kind is dependent on shares strategy, values, knowledge, and experience. Lacking those shared properties it is no longer possible to produce art that does not impose a cost instead of provide a return. Everything is open to economic analysis under propertarianism.)

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1548779115 Timestamp) UNDERSTAND: RELIGION IS THE HARDEST PROBLEM OF SOCIAL SCIENCE Because it is education and training of the intuition by suggestion using narrative, ritual, oath, and debt. And because the intuition is the lowest common denominator of decidability in a population, demanding the least reason, calculation, and calculation. We are not ignorant as we have been throughout history. What we call ‘spirituality’ is the evolutionary artifact of the reduction of cognitive, social, physical, and therefore emotional burden by submission to and membership in the pack(male bias) or herd (female bias), and the resulting feeling of peace, safety, and mindfulness that results from that submission (surrender of individuality) to the pack or herd. The more agency, opportunity, experience, peace, safety, and mindfulness one has the lower the demand for the feeling of ‘spirituality’. The less agency, opportunity, experience, pace, safety and mindfulness on has, the greater the demand for the mindfulness that results from submission(surrender of individuality) to the pack or herd. We cannot demand those lacking interpersonal, social, economic, political, and military market value survive without the training in mindfulness that makes possible individual, interpersonal, social, economic, political, and military cooperation with others and the benefits that come from it. That would be IRRECIPROCAL. However, we can at the same time limit the external agency of those who lack the agency and market value to use the political process to influence others where such an influence is against the natural law. By the demand for truthful speech in the commons in matters commercial, … we eliminate the incentive to use the untestifiable for profit. By eliminating the need for churches to obtain donations, we likewise eliminate the incentive to use the untestifiable for profit. By demanding the churches warranty their due diligence in the production of education in the personal, interpersonal, social, commercial, financial, economic, political, and military. This will have the effect of driving groups that are hostile to the natural law and to european civilization out of every aspect of life, and make ‘religions’ liable for the actions of their ‘products’: citizens.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1548779115 Timestamp) UNDERSTAND: RELIGION IS THE HARDEST PROBLEM OF SOCIAL SCIENCE Because it is education and training of the intuition by suggestion using narrative, ritual, oath, and debt. And because the intuition is the lowest common denominator of decidability in a population, demanding the least reason, calculation, and calculation. We are not ignorant as we have been throughout history. What we call ‘spirituality’ is the evolutionary artifact of the reduction of cognitive, social, physical, and therefore emotional burden by submission to and membership in the pack(male bias) or herd (female bias), and the resulting feeling of peace, safety, and mindfulness that results from that submission (surrender of individuality) to the pack or herd. The more agency, opportunity, experience, peace, safety, and mindfulness one has the lower the demand for the feeling of ‘spirituality’. The less agency, opportunity, experience, pace, safety and mindfulness on has, the greater the demand for the mindfulness that results from submission(surrender of individuality) to the pack or herd. We cannot demand those lacking interpersonal, social, economic, political, and military market value survive without the training in mindfulness that makes possible individual, interpersonal, social, economic, political, and military cooperation with others and the benefits that come from it. That would be IRRECIPROCAL. However, we can at the same time limit the external agency of those who lack the agency and market value to use the political process to influence others where such an influence is against the natural law. By the demand for truthful speech in the commons in matters commercial, … we eliminate the incentive to use the untestifiable for profit. By eliminating the need for churches to obtain donations, we likewise eliminate the incentive to use the untestifiable for profit. By demanding the churches warranty their due diligence in the production of education in the personal, interpersonal, social, commercial, financial, economic, political, and military. This will have the effect of driving groups that are hostile to the natural law and to european civilization out of every aspect of life, and make ‘religions’ liable for the actions of their ‘products’: citizens.