381500+ entries in 0.15s
mircea_popescu: da fuck is "bitcoin is fiat currency" supposed to mean ?
mircea_popescu: think about it : the first of your productions to be art,
mircea_popescu: whether you get some others to do the same in your general proximity is irrelevant, everyone's still doing it by himself.
mircea_popescu: if you wish to wallow in nonsense you're stuck doing it by yourself
mircea_popescu: lol no, you can't "Discuss" nonsense. to discuss a topic you have to renounce nonsense.
mircea_popescu: so if you don't really wish to discuss art, why are you ?
mircea_popescu: art is art. you disagree, you may be punished by your lord. end of story.
mircea_popescu: any conclusion is available to the inconsistent set of premises.
mircea_popescu: well the advantage of holding nonsense views (which utopianisms are by definiton) is that anything can be derived from them.
mircea_popescu: if the shipwreck survivor found is a noble or a peasant, not if he owns a lot of farms and what havd you
mircea_popescu: audience has nothing to do with it. this is wholly a medieval-inspired problem of probatory.
mircea_popescu: it only matters once it becomes "an old da vinci has been discovered"
mircea_popescu: nobody goes "i found a 500 year old kinda cool painting"
mircea_popescu: think of an old painting being discovered in a stahs. what is the question first and foremost asked ? is it something as to the paionting itself or is it as to the pedigree of the owner ?
mircea_popescu: it exists in the sense of masturbation, or w/e the author does in his privacy.
mircea_popescu: but this sort of drawer novel, as it was known, doesn't exist in the sense of art.
mircea_popescu: "so what's this idea ?" "it's nothing" "Then why am I watching it ?" "because it's on tv" "not yet."
mircea_popescu: you know that seinfeld episode when george is pitching to the network nubbins ?
mircea_popescu: the curse of this particular equalitarian-nominalism ogre is that it can't really make stateemnts.
mircea_popescu: i've shown the approach not to really work, we can move on
mircea_popescu: but this has little to do. you were discussing a particular application of the theory, with what i took as a view to reduce it to absurd.
mircea_popescu: and she throws out all their old shit cause now she knows better.
mircea_popescu: i pop into someone's house by the intermediate agency of his wife which is now my slave
mircea_popescu: <nubbins`> surely there must be something that makes mp a good judge and nubbins a poor one? << this implies that perhaps nubbins could move upwards in society, and contains implicit an equivalency of substance between the two. this isn't an accepted point between us.
mircea_popescu: nubbins is no such lord. we're going to have to explain why we presume.
mircea_popescu: mp is one of the lords. he makes art be. of course we can presume anything.
mircea_popescu: this naive "man at center of everything" goes well with the naive nominalism, but it's quite as nutty.
mircea_popescu: NOT the other way around, judge art by how it "makes" you weep or not.
mircea_popescu: there is no because in the correct statement. in fact, we can judge how good a nubbins you are by how adequately you weep when art is presented
mircea_popescu: these are not the same. and for that matter the latter's logically unsound.
mircea_popescu: mp said it's art, and it makes nubbins weep, vs nubbins thinks it;'s art because that's why he thinks he wept
mircea_popescu: when i say "it's art because X feels Y" i may be right. when you say "it's art because I feel Y" you're certain to be wrong.
mircea_popescu: it's quite a case of "you're cured if and when i say you're cured".
mircea_popescu: does the oncology patient go "all is well doc, i feel cured" ?
mircea_popescu: only in the minds of people who have no idea what it is.
mircea_popescu: obviously the surgeons are surgeons by decree rather than because "people" feel surgeonized by them
mircea_popescu: you don't discuss surgery in terms of the subjective impressions of patients. a similar discussion of any other craft is similarly out of place.
mircea_popescu: this may be true, but the subjection needn't be conscious.
mircea_popescu: you presume all action is with the voluntary subjection fo the subject
mircea_popescu: the remainder is the "to whom ?" approach, which reduces to social hierarchy.
mircea_popescu: the "to me" approach is unsound. this disqualifies it, perpetually and definitively.
mircea_popescu: it is the avatar of youth, but so are many other illogical topoi
mircea_popescu: looky, this trick where you go "mpex is too hard, i don;'t understand it ; therefore we must all glbse because there's no other way to do it" isn't logically sound.
mircea_popescu: except no one cares about any "to me" sentence. they're voiceless.
mircea_popescu: you might as well offer an explanation of art for spherical chickens that live in vacuums.
mircea_popescu: nubbins` yes, but your explanation requires people be equal and interchangeable, which is beyond naive.
mircea_popescu: incidentally, the miscasting as art as "that which yields emotional response" is roughly the reason trolling has become such a big deal culturally.
mircea_popescu: you might as well propose the cancer walk in the front door one day and begin jacking off.
mircea_popescu: more's the point : your example is counterfactual. i would never talk to some anodyne serf woman,