Theme: Civilization

  • WHAT IS THE CRITERIA FOR HIGH ART AND JUDGING HIGH ART? I teach that high art sh

    WHAT IS THE CRITERIA FOR HIGH ART AND JUDGING HIGH ART?
    I teach that high art should be judged by a concrete set of criteria: the materials, the craftsmanship using them, the design or aesthetics of the piece, the intellectual, cultural, and civilizational depth of content or meaning of the piece, it’s relevance to and position in the movement to which it belongs, and the scale – favoring monumental scale whenever possible.

    Usually we use the sequence decoration, design, craft, art, and high art to distinguish between different art forms. In the language of art historians, “high art” is typically used to denote those art forms that have been historically associated with the fine arts and are often characterized by their perceived higher status or more sophisticated, intellectual appeal. High art is often seen as having a focus on aesthetics and is associated with works that have been created for contemplative or aesthetic purposes, and not merely functional or practical ones.

    CATEGORIES
    High art typically includes works such as:
    Painting – Especially classical forms such as portraiture, landscapes, historical scenes, or mythological subjects rendered with high technical skill.
    Sculpture – Marble, bronze, or other high-quality materials sculpted into figures or scenes, often representing philosophical, historical, or mythological themes.
    Literature – Works of poetry and prose that are considered to have literary merit or significant artistic quality.
    Music – Classical music, opera, and complex instrumental compositions fall under this category.
    Dance – Ballet and other forms of structured, theatrical dance are included.
    Theater – This includes both dramatic and comedic works that are considered to have enduring and high cultural value.
    Architecture – Structures that are valued for their aesthetic, architectural innovation or historical significance.

    High art is traditionally thought to require a cultivated taste to be appreciated, which contrasts it with “low” or popular art forms that are generally more accessible and designed for mass consumption. However, the distinction between high and low art has been increasingly challenged and blurred, especially with the rise of postmodern art movements that reject such hierarchical categorizations.

    CRITERIA
    The criteria for judging high art is deeply rooted in the traditions of art theory and criticism. Let’s look at each element:

    Materials: The intrinsic value and durability of the materials used can signify the work’s intended permanence and importance. Historically, works made with precious or enduring materials are often classified as high art.
    Craftsmanship: The level of skill and expertise in manipulating materials is a testament to the artist’s mastery and the art’s potential to stand the test of time, an important consideration in historical high art.
    Design or Aesthetics: The formal qualities of art, including balance, proportion, harmony, and beauty, are crucial in art historical evaluation. The aesthetic innovation or adherence to classical standards often informs the work’s standing within the high art category.
    Intellectual, Cultural, and Civilizational Depth: This expands the content or meaning of a piece to include its ability to engage with and reflect upon broader intellectual, cultural, and civilizational discourses, which has always been a hallmark of high art through the ages.
    Relevance to a Movement: The work’s contribution to, representation of, or challenge to artistic movements is a key factor in historical significance and classification as high art, signaling its pivotal role in the evolution of art history.
    Scale: Monumental scale can be indicative of high art, partly because it suggests a level of ambition and resource investment, and partly because such works are often public or state commissions, which historically have had high status.

    This framework mirros the historical record and the scholarly discourse in high art. It encapsulates many of the attributes that have been revered and sought after in the arts over the centuries. The inclusion of intellectual, cultural, and civilizational depth particularly underscores the expectation that high art should engage with significant themes and contribute to the discourse of its time, which is a persistent thread throughout art history.

    Cheers

    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute
    The Science of Cooperation


    Source date (UTC): 2023-11-02 21:00:37 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1720184157551128576

  • NO NOT QUITE: THE DEMAND FOR RELIGION VS THE WEST –“The west tries to master na

    NO NOT QUITE: THE DEMAND FOR RELIGION VS THE WEST
    –“The west tries to master nature. Its enemies try to master minds. The west is lost when they forget the mind is part of nature.”– DontCare

    Interesting. I understand what you’re getting at, but: (

    a) it’s mastery of agency of mind within the limits nature, vs submission to intuitions and emotions in narratives independent of nature..
    (b) the difference originates in masculine (reals, political) vs feminine (feels, social) minds – when we are all somewhere on that distribution.
    (c) where we are all different in our intellectual abilities.
    (d) where we are all different in our age and experience.
    (e) and where religiosity is the product of:
    … (i) indocrination and
    … (ii) dominance of feminine empathizing instead of masculine systematizing.
    That’s the science.

    In other words, we will always need the spectrum because humans are distributed along the spectrum. The west is best under trifuctionalism at providing wisdom literatures across that spectrum:
    Mythology(anthropomorphism, integration),
    … Theology(wisdom, authority obedience),
    … … Philosophy(reason, justification, counsel),
    … … … History(evidence, arithmetic, analogy),
    … … … … Empiricism(correspondence, math, falsification),
    … … … … … Science(testimony, calculus, survival.),
    … … … … … … Operationalism(causality, constructive logic).

    Every step we take forward in that list, causes us to reform the previous step, until all steps are in harmony differing only in the method of conducting the argument.

    In other words we have failed to reform our religion as did Augustine to incorporate greek reason, Aquinas to give priority to science and reason in the material world. We had no Augustine or Aquinas in response to Darwin.

    And so the worst possible religion – the reformation of judaism(outcast rebellion) and christianity (slave rebellion) into the marxist sequence took root: marxism, neo-marxism(cultural marxism), postmodernism(truth marxism), feminism(family marxism), libertarianism(middle class marxism), neoconservatism (upper class marxism), and race marxism(‘woke’).

    The fault is the church for failing to reform. And it’s reasonable given that they had been losing for hundreds of years, and could not and did not learn from Augustine and therefore ‘claim victory’ that the church was right. instead they doubled down on dogma and supersition, and religion is almost gone from europe and heading to under 1/4 of the population in the USA.

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute
    The Science of Cooperation

    Reply addressees: @Dontcar25448459


    Source date (UTC): 2023-11-02 19:22:51 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1720159554455871488

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1720140426349343141

  • ETYMOLOGY OF THE WORD “SLAVE” The word “slave” entered the English language in t

    ETYMOLOGY OF THE WORD “SLAVE”
    The word “slave” entered the English language in the late 13th century and is derived from the early medieval Latin word “sclavus,” which meant “Slav.”

    The connection between the term “Slav” and “slave” can be traced back to the medieval slave trade. During the 9th century and onwards, many Slavs were captured and enslaved during the conquests of the Holy Roman Empire in Eastern Europe (Particularly Bosnia) and by the Ottoman Turks in Southeastern Europe, among other military campaigns.

    The Slavic people became synonymous with servitude to such a degree that the ethnic name “Slav” became the root word for “slave” in various Western European languages, reflecting the heavy trading and use of Slavic people as slaves during that period.

    GREEK, ROMAN, AND EARLY GERMANIC TERMS
    The terms for “slave” in ancient Greek, Roman Latin, and early Germanic languages reflect different nuances and origins related to the concept of slavery in these cultures:

    Ancient Greek: The term δοῦλος (doulos) was used to refer to a slave. In ancient Greece, slaves could be war captives, people who were enslaved due to debt, or born into slavery. The term encompasses a range of servile conditions, from chattel slavery to more domestic and integrated societal roles.

    Roman Latin: The Romans used the word servus for a slave. Slavery in ancient Rome was deeply integrated into the society and economy. Slaves were a significant part of the workforce, coming from various sources, including war captives, piracy, and trade networks. (They had rights)

    Early Germanic: The early Germanic term for a slave was þræll in Old Norse, which evolved into “thrall” in Old English. The Germanic tribes had a system of servitude that could involve bondage due to debt, capture in warfare, or birth into a servile class. The term thrall denotes a person who is in bondage or servitude. (They had rights)

    Each term reflects a somewhat different understanding and social integration of the concept of slavery. The Greek and Roman terms have directly influenced later European languages, whereas the early Germanic term has somewhat different connotations and is less directly visible in modern English, except as a historical or literary reference.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-11-02 17:36:42 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1720132842607218688

  • RT @TysonBay: @curtdoolittle The purpose of the negativa law is to produce the p

    RT @TysonBay: @curtdoolittle The purpose of the negativa law is to produce the positive building blocks of a stable civilization. This is h…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-11-02 17:11:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1720126393604792812

  • “The positiva is to build a virtuous civilization of mindful, capable, adults an

    –“The positiva is to build a virtuous civilization of mindful, capable, adults and their families.”– Francis


    Source date (UTC): 2023-11-02 15:19:53 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1720098410009854411

  • RT @WerrellBradley: MORAL STRUCTURE OF SOCIETY The moral structure of a civiliza

    RT @WerrellBradley: MORAL STRUCTURE OF SOCIETY

    The moral structure of a civilization represents the current expression of the Group Evolut…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-11-02 12:03:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1720048966245442034

  • No. The Jewish emphasis on scriptural law was a counter-reaction to greco-roman

    No. The Jewish emphasis on scriptural law was a counter-reaction to greco-roman law oncde t hey saw the effect of it. So they resurrected pre-500bc remnants and adopted the use of the law themselves. You will find almost all semitic behavior after the bronze age collapse, is just reaction to the superiority of the social, political, military, and technological advantages of indo europeans whether iranic, anatolian, or european.

    Likewise islam is largely the result of a counter-reaction against the Nicean effort to standardize the bible as law, with a law that was intolerable for the arabs and their tribalism. Before nicea christianity was ascendent in the orient.

    Reply addressees: @matthewolivan @whatifalthist


    Source date (UTC): 2023-11-01 16:08:10 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1719748174846304256

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1719743787205800135

  • RT @EPoe187: Over a 150 years later, intellectuals still have not accepted the D

    RT @EPoe187: Over a 150 years later, intellectuals still have not accepted the Darwinian revolution. Its central message is too ruinous to…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-11-01 04:16:33 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1719569086881886345

  • RT @curtdoolittle: @whatifalthist Because european civ doesn’t begin with farmin

    RT @curtdoolittle: @whatifalthist Because european civ doesn’t begin with farming and the sedentary cultures, it begins with cattle herding…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-10-31 23:04:09 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1719490470898815187

  • Because european civ doesn’t begin with farming and the sedentary cultures, it b

    Because european civ doesn’t begin with farming and the sedentary cultures, it begins with cattle herding, metalworking, wheel, horse, war, and MANEUVER (ooda loops), producing conquest, expansion, heroism, militarism, sky worshipping … and … get ready “military reporting” or what we call ‘testimony’. Farming is what you conquer the helots to do – so to speak. It is a fundamentally realist not experientialist understanding of the world. So the west begins with realism, naturalism, empiricism(observables), contractualism, and testimony to all. Which is just military reporting, and testimony before the jury, applied to all of life.

    And as usual, Rudyard is correct in his observation. The east has had little impact.

    Buy the reason the east does what it does is because CONFUCIUS FAILED to solve the problem of politics, and so having failed, he directed the society to the production of a hierarchy of families, and the perception of harmony to preserve it … becuase they failed to produce contract, law, rule of law. The evolution of the east is STATE command first not peer LAW first. The evolution of the west is law first not state first. The evolution of the middle east is religion first, state second and failed state and law. India roughly maintained religion and custom instead of law, and failed at the state. The only way to get to european civ is the same way we did it (by accident). Sovereignty > Reciprocity > Contract (democracy) > Testimony (empirical truth) > aristocracy (meritocracy) > Markets in everything. THereby preserving the trifunctional competition between feminine faith, masculine state, and neutral trade.

    I disagree with paradoxes (there aren’t any – really), the world isn’t an illusion – under testimony it’s just measurements using senses as a measure. Under technocracy and military it’s about market-coordinated voluntary actions in groups not invidiual imaginary life to escape the boredom of agrarian life. Family is just the first unit of cultural production. It’s militaries, states, and trade that build societies and civilizations. People who live in mind-world are just the peasants whose lives are dicated by those with ability, capacity, agency, and allies. If you can life in the mind instead of in the world the question is why would you? What incentives cause you to prefer the mind and self generated feelings vs experience of reality and reality generated feelings? (Powerlessness)

    ie: nietzche was not quite right. It’s not slave vs master, it’s not even peasant vs aristocracy. It’s feminine vs masculine.

    Reply addressees: @whatifalthist


    Source date (UTC): 2023-10-31 17:40:50 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1719409104911843328

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1719235488400204262