arinwisethoughtsYour comment is awaiting moderation.
Do you believe the hyper-focus on fake news has created more of a problem or a positive for media as a whole? People seem to trust news outlets less, but is this a good or bad development, in your opinion? I believe that there is certainly an obligation for us to not believe everything we see, but if the major news outlet of our country is declared “the enemy of the people” that certainly is a shift to a more fascist and authoritative view of the media.
Arin Kim Wisesays:
I agree that the meta layers that this movie offers would certainly baffle, and anger, Plato to no end. However, would he find some positives in the movie? For example, the extreme critique of Christianity, and the vehement condemnation of altering one’s reality by the two main characters at the end of the movie. However, these factors may be outweighed by the fact that we still don’t know if the characters are still in a game at the end of the movie, causing more confusion, and the fact that this is a form of art meant to portray a message that isn’t straightforward.
arinwisethoughtssays:
What do you think Tolstoy’s take on comedy was? Do you think he considered it a lower form of art like Aristotle seemed to? I think unintentioned comedy may evoke a reaction or an infection that could hold true to Tolstoy’s standards, but I agree that his view of art is incomplete. It fails to take into account that art can have value beyond emotional evocation and that popular art that appeals to the masses often doesn’t match up with his own standards of infectious ness.
(I COMMENTED SOMEWHERE ELSE BUT I CAN’T FIND IT?)
I want to be a teacher too! It’s really saddening when teachers fail their jobs, but it also is a reflection of the society we live in. The low wages, lack of respect, and consistent stress can cause teachers to be discouraged from teaching.
arinwisethoughtssays:
Is humor an emotion? Or is it just joy? I think it is separate from joy but that’s why it seems that a lot of these philosophers are vague around their terms for comedy. We can share laughter, and anger, and sadness, but also laughter is more easily contagious in my opinion than other emotions. I wonder if Tolstoy thought this?
I agree with you to an extent, that the banana can be art. But I do have to say I doubt it fulfills Tolstoy’s standards for art. It seems like an art piece that will shock the audience, make them question “is this even art”? rather than being an art piece for themselves. Unless the artist really did have some emotional release from taping a banana on the wall, I have no idea.
I think in the context of the world we live in, they can believe the material world is false, but they would also have to deal with the consequence of not acting accordingly. Though they could certainly be correct, their life in the present would be made difficult through their belief, illustrated by Plato’s lament that philosophers are never believed. It’s hard for people to grasp.
(529 words)
arinwisethoughts says:Your comment is awaiting moderation.
I think this piece is very interesting, and I think there definitely is meaning to be found here. It is certainly less obvious, but watching the video gives one a sense of confusion, fascination, and realization of our own mortality, which is communicated well and something I think Tolstoy would appreciate. I agree that we may not all feel the same way when looking at art, but Tolstoy’s point was that the best form of art is one that can clearly transmit a feeling that the viewer can feel, not necessarily the artist. He was more concerned about how well the message was communicated to many people. However, I agree there is a lot of gray area and everyone can interpret things differently.
arinwisethoughts says:Your comment is awaiting moderation.
I love this video! I’ve seen it before and it always leaves a lasting impression on me. I think the emotion that is being communicated is clear and sincere, and everyone will feel similar emotions when watching this video– a combination of joy, jealousy, and fulfillment. I think it also has a mass entertainment factor as well, as it is a public video with ordinary people, which is something Tolstoy would appreciate.
arinwisethoughts says:Your comment is awaiting moderation.
I believe Hume would think that Leonard’s condition is similar to our own. Leonard is perpetually stuck in living exactly in the moment– he has no identity and his memories are not strung together. This is similar to what Hume believes about us– we have no identity, and the identity we believe we had is an illusion of connection between the memories we have made. The truest version of ourselves exists only in the present moment, much like how the truest version of Leonard only exists in his present moments. As Teddy put it, “that was who you were, not who you are.” Leonard’s idea of identity, his name, job, etc, is who he was, but now he is not that person. His habit of his name is no longer accessible, which means he has no identity and therefore is not much different from us.
I agree! He uses the photos as a crutch to aid him when he forgets things, but he’s sort of stuck in a perpetual loop because he himself made it so he would never find John G. It begs the question if the photos are helping him, or entrapping him.
I feel that the intention of the artist is pretty palatable in my opinion. The intention is to illustrate the fear and desperation the artist himself was feeling while painting this, which can be deduced from the fact that he painted this in his dining room only for himself. I believe that when Tolstoy talks about intention, there doesn’t need to be a specific message, but a purpose behind the art. Art that appeals to people and conveys a strong emotion/intention behind that emotion is art according to Tolstoy, and I feel this painting does this pretty well.
I really like how you broke down the stages of memory. I think that is a very interesting thing to add, and more enlightening when considering this movie. I also think it is important to bring up how Leonard’s written notes are not only unreliable because he can be manipulated by others, but also he manipulated himself.
I think the fact that Leonard no longer knew what he was looking for made him into someone who was capable of murder. I believe Hume would not consider Leonard’s condition any different from ours because the truest version of Leonard is who he is in the present, similar to us, and how we have no identity except for who we are in this exact moment.
Thank you! Yes, great connection to psychology, I took a psychology class and had forgotten about that concept as well! I believe it is the brain’s way of dealing with trauma, from what I remember at least.
new comments — 658 words
Wise Thoughts And Poppycock 