tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8827040061563065922.post8515723112899587433..comments2024-03-18T14:05:44.909-05:00Comments on The Music Salon: Aesthetic Facts and OpinionsBryan Townsendhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09482696991279345516noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8827040061563065922.post-241530471750071332015-03-09T09:12:33.618-05:002015-03-09T09:12:33.618-05:00Aha, we have a philosopher in the house! Yes, Marc...Aha, we have a philosopher in the house! Yes, Marc, guilty as charged. I am somewhat of a closet Aristotelian.<br /><br />Ken, I am not a professional philosopher (though I have had many discussions with philosophers) but I think that we have to understand that there are different kinds and standards of proof. Mathematical proofs have a kind of standard that statistical probabilities lack. The reasoning used in moral philosophy is different from that used in metaphysics or epistemology. I think that McBrayer's reasoning in the NYT essay is an excellent example of moral reasoning, which is why I linked to it. Any talk of rights and responsibilities involves moral reasoning, which is not the same as scientific or mathematical reasoning. It does involve logic as we see when McBrayer points out the inconsistency between demanding that the students accept certain responsibilities while at the same time denying the existence of moral "facts" (or truths).<br /><br />Aesthetic reasoning, as Hume pointed out, shares some characteristics with moral reasoning. I have written a great deal about aesthetics on the blog as you will see if you do a search.<br /><br />While I have read Foucault, I don't recall what he has said about aesthetics. I am very intrigued by your idea about the Reformation. Have to look into that!Bryan Townsendhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09482696991279345516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8827040061563065922.post-76887475081690180912015-03-09T08:05:00.174-05:002015-03-09T08:05:00.174-05:00Bach > Bieber. This seems obvious, but how can ...Bach > Bieber. This seems obvious, but how can an aesthetic proposition be proven? I would be very interested to read more from you on aesthetics and philosophy. Do you think Foucault, for example (a favorite of Boulez, by the way), has anything of relevance that would prove Bach > Bieber. Historically, there may be an important fork in the road around the time of the Reformation and Counter-Reformation, where the Reformation went for music that accommodates the popular, and the Counter-reformation opposed that tendency with artistic gigantism which led to the Baroque. Just throwing out some ideas...Ken Fasanonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8827040061563065922.post-49561758626624632952015-03-08T16:15:51.628-05:002015-03-08T16:15:51.628-05:00Careful! You will be recalling the transcendentals...Careful! You will be recalling the transcendentals-- <i>unum, verum, bonum</i> (or <i>veritas, bonitas, pulchritudo</i>, if you prefer)-- if you don't watch yourself: the culture of the atomized masses can't allow that.Marc in Eugenehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04331547981498637474noreply@blogger.com