Is the Beauty of Knowledge Enough?

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

Originally posted by iron~orchid
(SNIP) -- the guy is not manipulating the woman -- ! (SNoP)

Nice of you to recognize my "perfection", but, not to disappoint you to much, alas, I am NOT perfect.

But, by God's grace, well practised at some things, including saying "NO", not just receiving it!

Thanks for recognizing the principal, it's lack has been what had been driving.

 

[quantumcarl]

Originally posted by Mr. Robin Parsons
What's weird is that you don't seem to think that you too can be(come) "a victim"

You haven't a clue about what "I seem to think".

My comment "weird" is about zippy's way of thinking, concerning how he could "victimize" 15 people or some bull***.

Its too juvenile to even go there.

I suggest that people who think the way zippy thinks reserve the experience for themselves and try jumping off a very high cliff.

I also suggest that you and I.O. start a thread on sexual harrassment.

You have de-railed this thread which pertains to the difference between art and science.

This tread does not pertain to victimization or any of the other topics you, zippy and I.O. have selectively distilled out of it.

But, that's just my take, remember?

Have a nice day.

 

[iron~orchid]

You are very bossy and griping and harassing, yourself, Master Carl.

I believe the mention of victim brought on the subject of sexuality and -- beg to differ -- but this subject is very much a part of much of the Artistic world and the Scientific world. IT is all in how YOU relate to it.

It is also a part of Politics which I mentioned is a bit in control of scientific research. How far can you go in your creativity if you do not recognize the signals and strings of manipulation being pulled ?

 

[iron~orchid]

...

It boils down to:

FREEDOM of EXPRESSION

-- an Artist has this --

-- a Scientist does not --

Therefore,
as stated previously in this thread...

"Physicists may write poetry but poets don't do physics. "

... Scientists have to have an outlet for such

FREEDOM of EXPRESSION (since the scientific vision is within a controlled environment) and they may use ART as such an outlet.

Thus, in my closing statement, I conclude that there is a carryover of Science becoming Art but not of Art becoming Science.

 

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

Carl the expression "Seem(s) to think" is a basis for the projection of my perception of your words, back out of me, seeking clarification from you, if I have read you wrong.

So telling me that I have no idea what you "seem to think" is about as, well, I'll stop there, because what you "seem to think" can only be framed by someone outside/aside of/from you!

The victim thing evolved out of something you stated, and followed through on with the second statement of "Victims are dead...(SNoP)", or have you forgotten your role in all of this?

 

[quantumcarl]

Originally posted by Mr. Robin Parsons
The victim thing evolved out of something you stated, and followed through on with the second statement of "Victims are dead...(SNoP)", or have you forgotten your role in all of this?

When someone has started a thread that explores the various ways each individual uses a word, we can disscuss this a little more.

When I use the word 'victim' it refers to the people who died as a result of an incident.

When a person has been raped, groped or "met Arnold" and lived, they usually prefer to use the word "survivor".

As for I.O.'s closing remarks:
If stating the obivous is considered "bossy" or "harrassment"... it is within your rights to think and say so.

As far as I know, the Freedom of Speech section of both Canada's and the US's Consitution and Charter of Rights provides for both Artists and Scientists and all other citizens of those countries.

Have a nice life.

 

[iron~orchid]

Dear Quantumcarl person

The words bossy and harassment were NOT in my closing remarks.

So YOU obviously overlooked anything I said or any point I made in my posts -- other than what pertained to you personally.

 

[FZ+]

It is also a part of Politics which I mentioned is a bit in control of scientific research. How far can you go in your creativity if you do not recognize the signals and strings of manipulation being pulled ?

This is pretty much irrelevant, as a differentiating quality of art and science.

Artists don't live on air. To each piece of art there is a religion, a society, a customer, a critic, a sponsor. To make a work of art, almost all artists must cater to the respective tastes - creativity much be tethered by petty opinions, and indeed is sourced from the same times and surroundings. But in both science and art, there are exceptions - artists who transcended their period, and scientists who defied them.

The existence of science is dependent on freedom of expression. An oppressed science is not a science, but politics dressed up in pretty words.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by FZ+ The existence of science is dependent on freedom of expression. An oppressed science is not a science, but politics dressed up in pretty words.

I'm not sure what you mean here. Science makes progress, even under totalitarian rule. What would be the difference between this and science produced otherwise?

 

[iron~orchid]

How can manipulation be irrelevant when a scientist is restricted or fully dependent on corporate or government funding ?

 

[selfAdjoint]

What happens is tht the kind of science the bosses are in favor of or indifferent to will flourish, and the kind they hate or want to manipulate will die off.

In the USSR, Lysenkoism, an uncientific form of biology, was the official line. And biology in the Soviet Union withered.

On the other hand physics was the darling child because of H-bombs and rockets and it flourished, so did mathematics, which the commissars had not much opinion about.

 

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

Originally posted by Quantumcarl
When a person has been raped, groped or "met Arnold" and lived, they usually prefer to use the word "survivor". Carl has spoken!
As far as I know, the Freedom of Speech section of both Canada's and the US's Consitution and Charter of Rights provides for both Artists and Scientists and all other citizens of those countries.

And that is the other remedy "The Law" affords, is to sue people who lie, and therefore mislead, and make them pay for there lies.

Then again, as it is evident in your signature Carl, you seem to like presenting item(s) of art work that are the creations of others, without accreditation to them, so no wonder you attempt to justify yourself in the manner that you do!
Tank's Carl!

 

[iron~orchid]

You know one thing about QCarl's...

"People use art as one way of measuring, mimicking and studying nature."

"People use science as another way of measuring, mimicking and studying nature."

...This is true ... People have to mimick nature.

-- as nature creates it's own art and science --

For instance, a natural plant extract that people have learned to use in some type remedy has total freedom of expression for a naturally occurring substance such as this extract material cannot be patented.

Thus, nature is mimicked with a resulting synthetic pharmaceutical invented to duplicate the active component of the plant.

It is nice to know that nature as an art or science cannot be manipulated by government or the corporate world. It can just be destroyed -- perhaps out of jealousy due to the non-control factor.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by selfAdjoint
What happens is tht the kind of science the bosses are in favor of or indifferent to will flourish, and the kind they hate or want to manipulate will die off.

True, and it is the same for art in regimes like that, but isn't a process of restricting here, encouragement there always at work in any state, if not for political, then for economic reasons, even if it's quite a bit subtler?

 

[saviourmachine]

creativity

It's common to make a difference between science and art. Why some people don't agree with this, has to do with the idea that an artist has a kind of creativity that a scientist lacks. They want to be called an artistic scientist, but they are 'only' working in a original way.

Art is pushing ideas in a fysical presentation.
Science is pulling ideas from a fysical world.