to my knowledge the nazis took inspiration from plato's republic, in terms of enforcing the strict hierarchies by promoting only the 'best' people to have children - I wouldnt be surprised if it also influenced their thoughts on art
I think copying is actually good, or desirable, or at the very least I think it makes sense in art. Copying allows us to respond, to comment, to react to the world around us. I believe all art is co-created with everything that is around us and that it would be impossible to do art with no copy. As to blatant "hard" copies, like cutting pieces of newspapers or painting a chair, I believe they are a way for us to add something of our own (or reflect something or add ideas to it). AI, I feel, is a different league, though, because I don't think art can be created without life (human or otherwise) and I don't deem computers alive.
I definitely agree with you that art is co-created and there's nothing wrong with this. Also, thank you for mentioning AI, something which I completely missed in my post. I used to actually be supportive of AI, in it's most creative capacity (rather than just generating studio Ghibli- inspired photos and infinite pictures of burgers), but it's negatives outweigh the positives what with its ecological impact, so thank you for bringing that up!
I think about this question often: "Why do you think it’s important to find links between philosophy and art?" My own answer is simply that art can act as a powerful reminder of the ideas philosophy discovers. We're forgetful creatures and given that "contemporary consumer culture centers around images" - we might as well have those images work for us rather than against us. For a fuller explanation, I invite you to consider my essay: https://www.theinneract.com/p/good-materialism 🖼️💡
to my knowledge the nazis took inspiration from plato's republic, in terms of enforcing the strict hierarchies by promoting only the 'best' people to have children - I wouldnt be surprised if it also influenced their thoughts on art
I think copying is actually good, or desirable, or at the very least I think it makes sense in art. Copying allows us to respond, to comment, to react to the world around us. I believe all art is co-created with everything that is around us and that it would be impossible to do art with no copy. As to blatant "hard" copies, like cutting pieces of newspapers or painting a chair, I believe they are a way for us to add something of our own (or reflect something or add ideas to it). AI, I feel, is a different league, though, because I don't think art can be created without life (human or otherwise) and I don't deem computers alive.
I definitely agree with you that art is co-created and there's nothing wrong with this. Also, thank you for mentioning AI, something which I completely missed in my post. I used to actually be supportive of AI, in it's most creative capacity (rather than just generating studio Ghibli- inspired photos and infinite pictures of burgers), but it's negatives outweigh the positives what with its ecological impact, so thank you for bringing that up!
I think about this question often: "Why do you think it’s important to find links between philosophy and art?" My own answer is simply that art can act as a powerful reminder of the ideas philosophy discovers. We're forgetful creatures and given that "contemporary consumer culture centers around images" - we might as well have those images work for us rather than against us. For a fuller explanation, I invite you to consider my essay: https://www.theinneract.com/p/good-materialism 🖼️💡
Your answer reminds me a lot of spiritualist works, like Evelyn De Morgan's 'Earthbound.' And thank you for link, I'll definitely check it out !