Re: Mind's Eye Re: Science and religion in modernity

MIT have a current exhibition that seems to get somewhere near my
interest - http://arts.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/Holocene-PR-Final.pdf

This is some of the blurb -

Through the work of artists spanning from the 19th to the 21st
centuries, the exhibition proposes that art acts as an investigative
and experimental form of inquiry, addressing or amending what is
explained through traditional scientific or
mathematical means: entropy, matter, time (cosmic, geological),
energy, topology, mimicry, perception,
consciousness, et cetera. Sometimes employing scientific methodologies
or the epistemology of science, other
times investigating phenomena not restricted to any scientific
discipline, art can be seen as a form of
investigation into the physical and natural world. In this sense, both
art and science share an interest in
knowledge and phenomena, yet are subject to different logics,
principles of reasoning, and conclusions. In the
Holocene suggests that art is itself an account of the world, and can
expand the potential of
investigative and experimental activity.
Emblematic of the central premise of the exhibition, Germaine Kruip's
film Aesthetics as a Way of Survival
(2009) documents the phenomenon in which the male bowerbird arranges
colored objects as part of its
courtship display, suggesting an aesthetic faculty at work even within
evolutionary behavior. Friedrich Fröbel
devised a pedagogical system centered on childhood learning through
color and form. Helen Mirra's sculptures
address geological time and extremophile forms of living matter.
Robert Smithson's interest in crystallography and
entropy are reflected in both his Four-Sided Vortex (1965) and
Partially Buried Woodshed (1970). Daria
Martin's Sensorium Tests (2012) revolves around a recently recognized
neurological condition called "mirror—
touch synaesthesia." For FT Marinetti, abstract mathematical objects
could stimulate in his readers the
subjective experience of the sounds, smells, and motions of modern
life; Iannis Xenakis' Diamorphoses (1957)
and Mycenae Alpha (1978) utilize mathematical operations as
compositional strategies for creating music.
Alfred Jarry's "pataphysics," John Latham's "Time—Base Theory," and
João Maria Gusmão and Pedro Paiva's
"Abyssology" are all examples of speculative systems of knowledge
constructed by the artists to address gaps
in historical, philosophical, and scientific discourse.

I resist chocolate-box aesthetics (however posh) and appreciation done
to establish superiority of sophistication and am wary of concepts of
elegance and beauty applied to science (most scientists I've known
thick of this as 'waiting for a blow-job from God' - the world always
proves untidy). In a way, I hope art might light up (say) the
financial system in a way extended argument cannot. I've just
finished a novel trying to do this, but can't get it to work - but how
could it when most of our shared concepts from literature are the
blocks to understanding?

On 23 Oct, 04:34, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> What a pleasure to read these recents posts.//I've noticed the
> politicians aren't saying much to retirees unless they think we are
> over the hill and expendable- except we tend to VOTE.// I only have
> one pair of reader glasses that are rx. I can get by with cheapies for
> cooking and shopping but the eye doctor told me this was not a very
> bright plan. One eye will not get the right whatever.// I have been
> rearranging closets and dressers of late and can't remember where I
> have switched things so it has been a riot trying to dress.//I did
> come across a line of Matthew Arnold's that a little math goes a long
> way for most of humanity and remembered my amazement walking into the
> wrong classroom and seeing four or five blackboards covered with some
> algebraic "work of art"- for it is an art.// I don't really need a lot
> of money but it just costs a lot to live in western economies built on
> self-sufficiency rather than tribal respect for the wise elders. :-)
>
> On Oct 22, 12:22 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > I have real problems remembering where I left my glasses (though not
> > the ones with beer in) - even the IMF are considering the old Chicago
> > Plan  (1936) for fairer money.  We live as paupers in the land of
> > plenty in my view.http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2012/
> > wp12202.pdf
>
> > It's long and boring, but the gist is in the short conclusion.  It
> > lacks your insight into what we are worshipping Al.
>
> > On 22 Oct, 07:27, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > People are expected to change and grow. the errors of the  past are
> > > meant to be out grown and evolved into a life that is kinder and
> > > gentler with others coming to the forefront leaving the self centered
> > > being behind,,  As I look around I am left wondering if this is what
> > > is occurring,,  I see wealth being more and more concentrated in the
> > > greedy few..  I see the traditional higher power being replaced by a
> > > god of gold and wealth, that is worshiped with immense intensity..
> > > an intensity that if applied to eliminating poverty ,, poverty would
> > > be eliminated world wide within a few short years.
>
> > > I have not forgotten anything to my knowledge Neil  I can remember my
> > > childhood to date in great detail  recall is not the problem and fear
> > > well that is more to keep me from getting killed..  I tend to like
> > > invisibility  good idea
> > > Allan
>
> > > On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 11:36 PM, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > With memories as bad as mine and yours Allan we have to invent for
> > > > fear of remembering we have forgotten everything.
>
> > > > On 21 Oct, 19:00, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> What happens when your whole concepts begin changing..   strange
> > > >> things like the entire universe becomes small  and you have to go out
> > > >> side its bounds..  Being a soul being what happens if the creation
> > > >> soul is earlier than than the creation of the universe?
> > > >> Allan
>
> > > >> On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 6:09 PM, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> > Science doesn't fascinate me in the way some literature and people can
> > > >> > generally - I suspect the 'enthusiasm' of the popularisation of the
> > > >> > subjects.  I concur on the predicament element rigs - insightive.  It
> > > >> > seems a mistake to me to try and place god in some scientific-
> > > >> > dimensional space (though I miss Pat) and I wonder instead whether the
> > > >> > god-positions people hack out are as baseless as, say, phlogiston - we
> > > >> > need some new thinking.
>
> > > >> > Science and critical history have demonstrated much religious text is
> > > >> > fable.  We repeatedly see that image management hides much that is
> > > >> > foul under 'preaching' - here our current examples would be Jimmy
> > > >> > Saville, Baby P, priestly paedophiles and Hillsborough (scouting in
> > > >> > the US etc.) - but I'd say we may be on the brink of realising
> > > >> > economics is equally vile.
>
> > > >> > I can imagine spending a few weeks with a group living human-
> > > >> > constrained lives in a collective of the future.  A woman kisses me
> > > >> > goodbye.  She will not see me again because I'm off to a near-space
> > > >> > terminal built off Alpha Proxima.  From there I'm relativity
> > > >> > travelling to the edge of this universe to undertake genetic
> > > >> > transformation beyond the gene-splicing that has allowed me to travel
> > > >> > in space.  I see in 16 colours thanks to a shrimp and can enter
> > > >> > cryostasis thanks to genes from Arctic fish.  I interface with
> > > >> > machines and their learning directly.  I can no longer replicate as a
> > > >> > human - etc.  Now I'm off to meet and form a collective with beings
> > > >> > who perceive much of the world we can only postulate.  In traditional
> > > >> > science fiction these 'dark beings' would be bastards intent on taking
> > > >> > over the human world.  What I don't see is any focus on a future in
> > > >> > which the rather soppy human-emotional ties are broken - a future in
> > > >> > which ...
>
> > > >> > One might ask how the creature I have become would get his jollies.
> > > >> > One can go the other way in history and ask what religion has actually
> > > >> > done.  We are not inventive enough about god.
>
> > > >> > On 21 Oct, 14:50, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > >> >> And some feel science is boring unless it can be translated into
> > > >> >> everyday life in meaningful ways.
>
> > > >> >> On Oct 20, 3:50 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >> >> > We travel at 60k plus miles an hour in the solar system and 500K
> > > >> >> > through the galaxy in our system.  I tend to believe we can measure
> > > >> >> > this kind of thing and that we are always left with questions like
> > > >> >> > Allan's about before after and beyond.  Hitch-hikers' Guide probably
> > > >> >> > gets to the irony.  Quite a few of us discount priests and text-
> > > >> >> > authority without giving up on spirit.  Spinoza remains the clearest
> > > >> >> > example.
>
> > > >> >> > Creation stories end up in infinite regress - scientific and otherwise
> > > >> >> > - and beg the question of 'what came before that' by positing a
> > > >> >> > fiction of something that needs no creator or origin.  I don't believe
> > > >> >> > god whipped up the Grand Canyon, but in the limits of our thinking
> > > >> >> > something whipped up something that led to the evolution of our planet
> > > >> >> > etc.  I tend to think science rather than literature may lead to a
> > > >> >> > different way of seeing this and surviving until this is possible.
> > > >> >> > Literature is generally bland and lacks depth - though there are great
> > > >> >> > moments.  I suspect one of the key issues is raised by Gabby a lot of
> > > >> >> > the time - we need to replace current authority and know the irony is
> > > >> >> > such attempts just produce the same old business as usual (WB Yeates
> > > >> >> > was good on this).
>
> > > >> >> > The stuff on thermodynamics above is very similar in method to
> > > >> >> > Einstein and what we might now term Wittgensteinian deconstruction -
> > > >> >> > trying to find the common elements and mistakes in various competing
> > > >> >> > arguments and readdress the apparent conflict.  Molly has some words
> > > >> >> > on this too.
>
> > > >> >> > On 20 Oct, 20:37, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >> >> > > google books had a copy up online, it may still be there.  Used book
> > > >> >> > > outlets like Alibris will allow you to put in the book you are searching
> > > >> >> > > for and notify you when a copy becomes available for sale by a store that
> > > >> >> > > uses their service.  Other than that, you may find some good articles about
> > > >> >> > > it with excerpts online.  for Einstein fans, it is a favorite.
>
> > > >> >> > > On Saturday, October 20, 2012 10:14:03 AM UTC-4, Allan Heretic wrote:
>
> > > >> >> > > > how does a person get a hold of the original text..??
> > > >> >> > > > Allan
>
> > > >> >> > > > On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Molly <moll...@gmail.com <javascript:>>wrote:
>
> > > >> >> > > >> The Einstein "The World As I See It," originally began as his ponderance
> > > >> >> > > >> of something greater than science, and acknowledgement of spirit in action.
> > > >> >> > > >>  The original edition is the best, as his editors put together texts with
> > > >> >> > > >> lectures for him under the same name, and those books have an entirely
> > > >> >> > > >> different flavor.
>
> > > >> >> > > >> From my view, "knowing" is not the end of it, but the beginning.
>
> > > >> >> > > >> On Saturday, October 20, 2012 8:09:19 AM UTC-4, gabbydott wrote:
>
> > > >> >> > > >>> Honestly, Vam, I don't think that it was Einstein's lack of knowledge
> > > >> >> > > >>> that made him pose such a daft (in the sense of limited) question. I read
> > > >> >> > > >>> this as a description of the state of occidental science at his time - the
> > > >> >> > > >>> conflict between the ontological and the constructivist explanatory models
> > > >> >> > > >>> of the nature of knowledge.
>
> > > >> >> > > >>> On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Vam <atewa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >> >> > > >>>> You spoke of Einstein, about his " only " interest being whether God<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God> had
> > > >> >> > > >>>> any choice in manifesting the universe and this observed creation.
>
> > > >> >> > > >>>> My own suggestion is that if we do not know enough we will always think
> > > >> >> > > >>>> along those lines.
>
> > > >> >> > > >>>> To the uninitiate, the desktops of today would seem to be thinking
> > > >> >> > > >>>> entities ...
>
> > > >> >> > > >>>> *So, do we know enough ?*
>
> > > >> >> > > >>>> <https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-EBJSz8MhWQU/UIJGzwpvR3I/AAAAAAAAB0...>
>
> > > >> >> > > >>>> On Saturday, October 20, 2012 6:36:45 AM UTC+5:30,
>
> ...
>
> read more »

--