Up@dawn 2.0

Thursday, October 23, 2014

Sect. 10 Group 3 10/23

We defined what we believed art to be. Some think it's anything that someone created, others say it is the effort put into whatever your 'art' is. It requires thought.

What if you have a piece of art that is completely wrong? For example, a painting of an event that never happened but involves real people and real places. Is that art? Someone said "Well, why not... If art is anything."


  1. Anonymous11:32 PM CDT

    Francisco Pezzimenti
    Meaning of Esse est percipi? Answer ''to be is to be perceived''
    Do you think that things stop existing when they stop being perceived?
    Related Link
    http://www.luigigobbi.com/jokesaboutphilosophers.htm to have a laugh

  2. FQ: (T/F) Locke believed that if a person could not remember a crime they committed in the past, than they are not culpable.
    A: T

    DQ: Are you the same person you were when you were born?

    Link: Here is an awesome Radiolab episode that talks a lot about translation and language: http://www.radiolab.org/story/translation/

  3. FQ: According to the Irish philosopher George Berkeley anything that stops being _____ ceases to _____.

    DQ: In what ways have you changed since you came to college? What makes you the same from who you were before?

    More on George Berkeley:

  4. FQ:
    According to lock, you could be the same man, but not the same ____.

    Do you have any defining moments in your life? Is there a time in your life where your characteristics and beliefs were shown through their actions?


  5. Anonymous12:39 PM CDT

    Katherine McCann
    Locke use the word ___ to refer to the human animal

    Do you think you could be the same person you were in your past life or even in your own life?


  6. FQ: personal identity relies on overlapping __________ not on total recall.
    DQ: do we perceive the world directly or indirectly?
    Link: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=X-buzVjYQvY

  7. Anonymous12:53 PM CDT

    I spent some time thinking about art, and I’ve come to the conclusion that I’m no art critic in any sense of the word. I do feel however, that someone’s art is an extension of his or her speech. They are just using a non-linguistic method of expression.

    I feel confident in this, because our countries legal precedents cover art under the 1st Amendment protection of free speech. But I also feel that it can only be considered philosophical if someone has intent behind the design to convey a point, or feeling beyond simply drawing as a recreation. To assume that someone’s work is meant to be philosophical without them being clear on that risks misinterpreting something that has no universal translation but is indeed dependent on the artists thought process while the pencil or brush strokes the canvas, or the clay takes shape.

    Onto the business of the day…

    FQ: List one of the two documents that John Locke helped inspire with his views on Natural Rights.

    DQ: Do Locke’s views on freedom require a religious foundation to support them, or can someone hold those values without a belief that they are “God-given” rights?

    Link: An analysis of some of Locke’s work compared to the Declaration of Independence and some late 18th/early 19th century debates on plagiarism. Let’s hope we will never be held to such strict standards of intellectual property. Everybody these days just restates what someone else has said more eloquently previously in human history. Especially philosophers.


  8. Anonymous12:40 PM CDT

    Aubrey Kremer
    Fq:Locke was targeted by government (t/f)
    Dq:Can you define good Art?