an article about Pavel Florensky

[Muhaha]

Re: an article about Pavel Florensky

Hipeter924, this may sound paradoxical, but there are very few people in the west that are in fact free. There is a fundamental misconception about freedom in that one often mistakes individual freedoms that are external for inner freedom which, in fact, is the only one that matters. Inner freedom is not a given. You have to conquer it by yourself, through a struggle. This requires strength of will. In the modern world, man pursues comfort, well-being. In this well-being lies a great challenge for human freedom, possibly greater than that offered by oppressive societies.
In open societies, we have individualism but we have very few true individualities.

Oh really? What good is "Internal Freedom" if your being thrown into a meat grinder? BTW, what exactly is internal freedom? Happiness for the sake of happiness?

[axel]

Re: an article about Pavel Florensky

What good is...

What good is it to call yourself armenian if you don't share the very spirit of your nation? Inner freedom doesn't have to do with happiness. It has to do with greatness. But I don't think I can argue on this matter with someone who asks the following sort of questions:

http://forum.hyeclub.com/showpost.php?p=285292&postcount=12

PS: Judging what is good and what is not depends on a set of beliefs. What is good? Does good exists? Prove it. What is truth? Does truth exists? Prove it. But then how can you prove truth exists if you do not admit truth exists in the first place... So much for people who think reason can stand on its own.

[axel]

Re: an article about Pavel Florensky

Hipeter924, I will quote from an interview of Andrei Tarkovsky. This dates back to 1985. His argument is on culture but hopefully you will get the point.

Q: I get the impression — perhaps I am wrong — that whenever you talk about Western audiences the tone of your remarks turns very critical.

A: It is not so much critical... This is criticising not so much Western audiences but the situation this audience finds itself in, the state of culture in the West. For example, for Russians, even now, culture and works of art have always carried certain spiritual, mystic, or — if you prefer — prophetic significance. A similar understanding of culture has to a very large extent also developed in Poland. Here, in the West, culture has long ago become an object of consumption, a consumer property. What does culture mean for them? Culture is what I can have. As a result of my being free. And what does it mean free? — I am free to have what everyone here has. Does culture exist in the West? It does. Thus I can and I have the right to use it. And what does it mean: I can? Well, just — physically, pragmatically — I can. It won't even occur to him to pause and think: yes you can but are you able to digest it? Let's take Goethe for example — you read Faust — but have you been able to read it? You can, obviously you can, please go buy yourself Faust. Only you'll never buy Goethe's Faust. You'll go to the pictures where you'd rather watch a Spielberg film; and if you go to a bookshop, you'll buy a comic or some bestseller or other which one ought to buy. That's all. You won't buy Thomas Mann, you won't buy Hesse, Faulkner, Dostoievsky. See, this is it: you can buy everything. Yet in order to absorb culture one has to make an effort equal to artist's own when he was creating his work. And this won't even occur to such consumer. He thinks: I can go and buy; all I have to do is pay. This is where the lack of spirituality leads. It won't occur to him that art is aristocratic — in the spiritual sense of the word, I repeat, God forbid I should use it in any other sense.

They say: élitist art. What does it mean élitist? Art always expects everyone should be able to understand, to comprehend it. It awaits this moment. Every work of art is created for this purpose. Yet they say: élitist because it is not immediately understandable. And what does it mean not understandable? Art cannot be... Goethe said that to read a good book is as difficult as to write one. This means in order to understand the author's aim one must perform certain spiritual work. I repeat: a creative artist is not someone who opposes his people, he is an individual who serves them.

[axel]

Re: an article about Pavel Florensky

One could also quote (once again) Solzhenitsyn's Harvard address, a very good synthesis.

[Muhaha]

Re: an article about Pavel Florensky

What good is it to call yourself armenian if you don't share the very spirit of your nation?

Are you saying I don't share the spirit of Armenia? What spirit is that?

Inner freedom doesn't have to do with happiness. It has to do with greatness.

Greatness in What?

But I don't think I can argue on this matter with someone who asks the following sort of questions:
http://forum.hyeclub.com/showpost.ph...2&postcount=12

Why can't you argue with someone with a different set of beliefs?

PS: Judging what is good and what is not depends on a set of beliefs. What is good? Does good exists? Prove it. What is truth? Does truth exists? Prove it.

What is good is what advances the species. Truth is whatever can be tested and observed.

But then how can you prove truth exists if you do not admit truth exists in the first place... So much for people who think reason can stand on its own.

Who isn't admitting the existence of truth?

[axel]

Re: an article about Pavel Florensky

Are you saying I don't share the spirit of Armenia?

Yes this is what I am saying as you don't understand Avarair.

What is good is what advances the species

This is your belief. Why is it good?
Whatever the answer, I can keep on asking why until you have no answer left.

Who isn't admitting the existence of truth?

There is no rational basis for that. It's a matter of faith.

[Muhaha]

Re: an article about Pavel Florensky

This is your belief. Why is it good?

Because we would die if we didn't evolve and advance ourselves.

Whatever the answer, I can keep on asking why until you have no answer left.

Okay, keep asking.

There is no rational basis for that. It's a matter of faith.

Rational basis for what? I asked you a question, I didn't assert anything.




EDIT: Are you going to talk about the original reason for why I quoted you, which was your assertion that "Internal Freedom" is the only type that matters, or have you abandoned that position?

[hipeter924]

Re: an article about Pavel Florensky

One could also quote (once again) Solzhenitsyn's Harvard address, a very good synthesis.

The collapse of the US financial institutions and the decay of the US economy has insured that the world is now getting close to being led (if not already) from Asia's powerhouse countries such as China, Japan, India.

As for the US itself, it is heading towards Corporate Police State, as the economy declines, and the democratic system becomes more and more corrupted and intertwined with the major corporate entities ideas and aspirations. In fact in many cases the Corporate Police State already exists in the US, when you vote for a President for example the corporations buy a candidate by donating vast sums of money to their favoured candidate.

[axel]

Because we would die if we didn't evolve and advance ourselves

why should we live?

Rational basis for what? I asked you a question, I didn't assert anything

Who are you trying to fool?
Do you or don't you admit the existence of truth?
If you do, you believe in it.
If you don't, I'm wasting my time arguing with a clown.

[Armanen]

Re: an article about Pavel Florensky

They say: élitist art. What does it mean élitist? Art always expects everyone should be able to understand, to comprehend it. It awaits this moment. Every work of art is created for this purpose. Yet they say: élitist because it is not immediately understandable. And what does it mean not understandable? Art cannot be... Goethe said that to read a good book is as difficult as to write one. This means in order to understand the author's aim one must perform certain spiritual work. I repeat: a creative artist is not someone who opposes his people, he is an individual who serves them.

This is a very powerful message and I feel too many never even consider this aspect of culture in general or art specifically.