tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6740358940867847508.post629401917762430089..comments2023-10-28T02:56:49.710-07:00Comments on Alfred Corn's weblog: Aesthetics and physiologyAlfred Cornhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08120701708290725662noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6740358940867847508.post-46243311874989151392008-05-17T09:48:00.000-07:002008-05-17T09:48:00.000-07:00Thanks for that thoughtful reply. I don't see the ...Thanks for that thoughtful reply. I don't see the connection between Social Darwinism and the progressive doctrine of free expression and debate. Human arguments are at stake in public discussion, but not individual subsistence and survival.<BR/><BR/>No, I wasn't suggesting that there is "one story and one story only," as a famous poem of Robert Graves says. Our physiology doesn't allow for an =infinite= variety of pleasurable responses, but it can accommodate many, many kinds of artistic experience. So we don't need to be afraid that only one kind of painting, music composition, or literary work will dominate the field. Meanwhile, discussing our likes or dislkes where art is concerned belongs to free expression as well.Alfred Cornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08120701708290725662noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6740358940867847508.post-24496408400964571322008-05-16T13:21:00.000-07:002008-05-16T13:21:00.000-07:00Alfred,With all due respect, It troubles me that y...Alfred,<BR/>With all due respect, It troubles me that you so readily adopt a kind of social Darwinism to aesthetic theory, particularly since you have advocated in past blogs for a healthy plurality. <BR/>As you say, "If we have freedom of expression, the best and strongest arguments will carry the day eventually. And weak or hysterical or cheap or mean-spirited arguments will be shown up as just that. They fall under their own gavel." <BR/>This feels uncomfortably like a might is right attitude. Is it possible that in a civilized society we might encourage various strands and arguments and theories and encourage multiculturalaesthetic variation. <BR/>Your reasoning comes uncomfortably close to how one might justify free market predatory capitalism over say, social democracy and further argue that a work of arts validity, viability and worth can be measured in direct proportion to its performance in the marketplace--"the best and strongest argument."<BR/>Can you please clarify/amplify your argument for me. What are you thinking? <BR/>Also, for the record, Elaine Scarry's "On Beauty" was published in 1999.<BR/>I look forward to your reply.<BR/>Best,<BR/>Philip AlvaréPhilip Alvaréhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00002195161647676411noreply@blogger.com