January 18th, 2007, 06:01 AM #1
Philosophy question: Which is MORE beautiful?
Something that is made by man(EX:"Mona Lisa, "Michelangelo's David"), or made by nature(EX:"the wave", "Hopetoun Falls")?They say technology slows down for no one. I know it outruns my wallet. I figure its because my wallet isn't light enough yet.
TechIMO Folding@home Team #111 - Crunching for the cure!
dulce bellum inexpertis
January 18th, 2007, 08:37 AM #2
the girl that got kicked off the beauty and the geek last night was prettier. So I vote nature!
January 18th, 2007, 08:44 AM #3
art is just a way to copy nature, even abstract art. it's because we're part of nature.
btw mona lisa herself is nature too^^
anyway i vote nature too (but i have to add, not created but evolved ;p because i can imagine a much much nicer place to live than on this earth^^)
January 18th, 2007, 08:55 AM #4
lets get down to brass tacks.
My perception is what causes beauty.
January 18th, 2007, 09:24 AM #5
Why is this in the political forum? This division thing is lame.
Oh, are you guys going to fight over the answer? Perhaps that man can never create the beauty that God creates, right?
January 18th, 2007, 09:39 AM #6
No it is not lame.
No god did not make beauty
there is no god (I think)
George Bush is the greatest leader in history!!!
January 18th, 2007, 09:55 AM #7
anyway i just have to reconsider my answer, most "nature" i've seen is from pictures, movies etc. this is only a copy of nature but i love the pictures, and i can remember for example, a picture of the eiffeltower was MUCH much more impressive than standing directly undermeath it, same with the mountains of switzerland etc. a picture can be much more than the reality itself because the art component is VERY important
January 18th, 2007, 10:04 AM #8
January 18th, 2007, 10:21 AM #9
January 18th, 2007, 10:43 AM #10
Very tough question. If you are a Platonic, then you would argue that man made art is as beautiful as natural "art". This is because in the intelligible world everything is absolutly "perfect" in EVERY way.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so as the beholder I believe that human art has more depth to it, more room for inturpretation...so from a humanistic point of view, it is more beautiful.
But on a purly juxtoposition comparison, I find that natural beauty is more "beautiful"
P.S. I don't really know why I am writing this, I guess I am just bored"I thought what I'd do was, I'd pretend to be one of those deaf-mutes" Or Should I?
Chapter 25, The Catcher in the Rye
January 18th, 2007, 12:32 PM #11
- Join Date
- Mar 2003
- Joplin, MO
- Blog Entries
both. art is made of nature and is nature. Its merely nature sculpted to weed out the undesirables, which often leaves me with the feeling its too polished and "fake". OTOH, art is a wonderful way to see a sliver of someone's mind, and that can be utterly amazing.Good job, friend-of-friends!
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
By twin_terry in forum General Tech DiscussionReplies: 3Last Post: October 30th, 2004, 11:48 PM
By Theophylact in forum IMO CommunityReplies: 1Last Post: January 20th, 2004, 04:28 AM
By Argon88 in forum IMO CommunityReplies: 40Last Post: April 15th, 2003, 11:08 AM
By somecallmetim in forum IMO CommunityReplies: 4Last Post: October 30th, 2002, 12:42 PM
By ClubMed in forum IMO CommunityReplies: 2Last Post: March 5th, 2002, 08:50 AM