Aiming for a Rating. Your Thoughts?

"Only if you haven't explored beyond Phil 101...which you obviously haven't."

Well, many philosophers disagree with you. They must have only taken 101 then, right?

"Are you admitting, by this statement, that not all things are art, even if intended? Seems so. Way to shoot yourself in the foot."

No. I'm mocking your ridiculous definition. In fact, that shooting would be coming from you. You just said that art was art because it was meant to be. Now you say: "that not all things are art, even if intended"

Which one is it? Please tell me, philosophy master!

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BoBVila
Well, many philosophers disagree with you. They must have only taken 101 then, right?

---

More philosophers agree with me. And I'll bet, for the most part, the ones who don't, did later in their lives.

Quote:

---

No. I'm mocking your ridiculous definition.

---

First, it wasn't a definition. Second, reguardless of your intention, the implication of that "mockery" was that not all things that are intended to be art actually are.

You really need to get a handle on both philosophy and the English and advenced grammar thereof if you'd like to continue.

"You really need to get a handle on both philosophy and the English and advenced grammar thereof if you'd like to continue."

hahhahaha...oh please, you're too much fun. Advenced grammar, eh?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BoBVila
Now you say: "that not all things are art, even if intended"

---

No I didn't, sweetheart. You did. I was simply pointing it out. Not to mention the fact that I agree with it anyway. Not everything that is intended to be art actually is. I've stated this previously. It should come as no supprise to you.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BoBVila
...oh please, you're too much fun. Advenced grammar, eh?

---

Yes. You don't seem to be able to deconstruct sentences properly.

I'm done with you.

*chalks another up in the win column*

You can make up your own definition of art if you want. I'll stick with the ones in the dictionary, thanks.

Oh wait, no here's my definition "Art is an expression created by three Martians on Earth depicting a flowery landscape"

damn art is rare! lol! That's pretty easy.

uhhhh....Looks like I opened up a can of worms. :D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Captain Vegetable

This particular quote really makes me think about what I consider art vs. what anyone else considers art.

---

what is art rests soley on the eye of the viewer.

there is no one single definitive definition of art, its something different for every viewer.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BoBVila
*chalks another up in the win column*

You can make up your own definition of art if you want. I'll stick with the ones in the dictionary, thanks.

Oh wait, no here's my definition "Art is an expression created by three Martians on Earth depicting a flowery landscape"

damn art is rare! lol! That's pretty easy.

---

Hardly a victory, BoB. The simple fact that I refuse to speak further on this topic doesn't make you any more correct than when we began.

P.S. I never "made up my own definition of art." But if that's what you're reading, so be it.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by UndeadKing
uhhhh....Looks like I opened up a can of worms. :D

---

Undoubtedly. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Shin Johnpv
what is art rests soley on the eye of the viewer.

there is no one single definitive definition of art, its something different for every viewer.

---

I suppose this is true...though I admit it begrudedly.

But you had a problem with me because you said that it matters all about the designers' intentions and whether profit was involved (neither of which is in any "official" definition)?

Hypocritical? Naahh...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BoBVila
But you had a problem with me because you said that it matters all about the designers' intentions and whether profit was involved (neither of which is in any "official" definition)?

Hypocritical? Naahh...

---

Damn, dude! You snuck up on me.

I said the designer's intentions matter because you're definition demonstrated as much, thereby nullifying your supposition. And there is a difference between a one of a kind work of art, and a mass produced product. I.E. The Notre Dame Cathedral:

http://launay.org/5eme/normal/notre-dame.jpg

...is much more a work of art than the row-homes up the street:

http://www.census.gov/pubinfo/www/ph...omes.hires.jpg

That doesn't mean a mass produced items cannot be art, but this illustration suits my argument.