|
|
|
|
|
|
by superhuzza
2844 days ago
|
|
|
What are you even talking about? Aesthetics is literally considered a branch of western philosophy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Branches_of_philosoph... I'm not suggesting my definition of beauty is better, but it's definitely more appropriate given the context. Language is meant to communicate, which is why it's context sensitive. If someone tells me they have a theory about why the sink is blocked, I don't expect it to be a scientific theory - given the context. And since I make a living from art and design, yeah I feel that I am qualified to have a few opinions on art. But maybe I should just leave that to the philosophers eh? |
|
|
That self-same wikipedia page you listed also denotes Logic and Cosmology as branches of Philosophy, and the Wikipedia page for Philosophy also lists Physics, Mathematics, Economics, Linguistics. Calling aesthetics a "branch" of philosophy in the pejorative sense that you have here is absurd, given that just about any serious humanity is technically an area of Philosophy.
Yes, I agree that language is contextual. And when you discovered that you were using a very informal definition of beauty on a board full of extremely well educated pedants, while having yourself only a middling appreciation for the study of aesthetics, you'd think your language would modify to reflect that realization. :D
As to your field -- working in a field related to Aesthetics does not mean you have education in Aesthetics.
I make a living in Art and design as well, but that isn't the foundation for my arguments in Aesthetics. Quite the contrary. People working in Art are usually some of the least educated in aesthetics, since our art education has been destroyed by baby boomer hippies.
Don't confuse your craft of Art, with the science of aesthetics.
That would be as absurd as an engineer arguing that his having built a building which stands up to gravity means he has a strong education in the study of gravity. The one hardly relates to the other.
The ability to create works which stand up to the gravity of Aesthetics does not mean that one has a strong education in Aesthetics itself.
Now, I'm not going to say that every engineer who hasn't studied theoretical physics is in a poor position to be an engineer, but it certainly tells you something about their seriousness if they haven't read any books in the field.
Further, if an engineer went to some length to pejoratively tell me that Physics is just a branch of western philosophy when debating the theoretical foundation of the force of gravity, I'd similarly call them out as seemingly not serious.