Here's something for all you people who think its OK to kill the comatose...

Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Pages:
1
…
6
7

Here's something for all you people who think its OK to kill the comatose...
Tweet Topic Started: Nov 16 2012, 01:04 AM (2,659 Views)
Klaus	Nov 20 2012, 02:30 AM Post #151
HOLY CARP!!! Posts: 19,403 Group: Members Member #350 Joined: May 21, 2006	ivorythumper Nov 19 2012, 04:13 PM you have labelled me a concretist by implication, which is not the least bit accurate and I don't see my position reflected in. I suppose you have to do that to navigate your mental world, rather than actually engaging living breathing human beings in all their complexity and contradiction. A what? A "concretist"? I don't know what exactly that is supposed to be, but you said that adults have settled to a consistent world view when they are 30 or 40, implying that it doesn't change much if at all after that. Quote: Again, you have clearly labelled me a labelist, though I have never used the term and don't recognize myself in it. See how that works? No, it doesn't work. I have described a specific behavior of yours. Labeling means to identify somebody with a label, or a set of labels, and implicitly assume that that person's point of view is also consistent with other facets of that label, although that person has never stated these points of view. Quote: There is no "ontology" of labels -- a label is artifice. As are ontologies. An ontology is an organized network of labels. Quote: You may consider that "in need of constant re-validation" -- as if we all don't do exactly the same thing and that all thinking persons are not constantly doing the same thing. Does it make you feel superior to think that you are doing something your interlocutor is not doing? Or have you just not really thought this one through either? Well, you were the one who said that: Quote: there is virtually no likelihood that one is wrong if one understands the flaw in the position of the others who disagree with him. That's not arrogance, that's reason. So you said that you don't need to reconsider your point of view, because you have fully understood the flaw in the position of the others. Also, if it were so self-evident that basically everyone is constantly re-validating his view of the world, then why was the Catholic Church so upset about ~~Dewey's~~Luther's "Ecclesia semper reformanda est" Quote: Even, for instance, the point of mentioning reductionism does not make you a reductionist -- it is just an implication of materialism that does not easily admit of anything but physics and chemistry and the like. Why do you even feel the need to constantly mention all these abstract concept and associate them to what people said here? To give the impression of being educated? I think this is just bloated language which makes it needlessly hard to understand your point. Quote: If you do want to appeal to something other than physics and material stuff, what exactly would it be? This is a valid question, but not one that has a quick answer, and it doesn't fit to this thread.
	Trifonov Fleisher Klaus Sokolov Zimmerman


Dewey	Nov 20 2012, 04:00 AM Post #152
HOLY CARP!!! Posts: 17,117 Group: Members Member #74 Joined: April 19, 2005	Small point of historical order: "Ecclasia reformata, semper reformanda secorum verbum Dei" orinated not with Dewey, nor Luther, nor Calvin, but rather, first appears in a 1674 devotional by Dutch Reformed pastor Jodocus van Lodenstein, who was involved in the Dutch Second Reformation. Just in case anyone really wanted to know.
	"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14


Klaus	Nov 20 2012, 04:19 AM Post #153
HOLY CARP!!! Posts: 19,403 Group: Members Member #350 Joined: May 21, 2006	If you wouldn't have told me, I'd have guessed that Jodocus van Lodenstein is a regular player for Ajax Amsterdam
	Trifonov Fleisher Klaus Sokolov Zimmerman


John D'Oh	Nov 20 2012, 04:54 AM Post #154
MAMIL Posts: 53,812 Group: Members Member #276 Joined: October 19, 2005	I'd always assumed that concretism was a 1960's movement in architecture.
	What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?


Renauda	Nov 20 2012, 06:26 AM Post #155
HOLY CARP!!! Posts: 10,507 Group: Members Member #505 Joined: September 5, 2007	That would make sense. At any rate, more sense than this thread.



John D'Oh	Nov 20 2012, 07:43 AM Post #156
MAMIL Posts: 53,812 Group: Members Member #276 Joined: October 19, 2005	Renauda Nov 20 2012, 06:26 AM That would make sense. At any rate, more sense than this thread. I've seen David Lynch movies that make more sense than this thread.
	What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?


Renauda	Nov 20 2012, 08:12 AM Post #157
HOLY CARP!!! Posts: 10,507 Group: Members Member #505 Joined: September 5, 2007	Not only Lynch films, but the movie Rubber even makes more sense than this thread.



Klaus	Nov 20 2012, 09:14 AM Post #158
HOLY CARP!!! Posts: 19,403 Group: Members Member #350 Joined: May 21, 2006	John D'Oh Nov 20 2012, 04:54 AM I'd always assumed that concretism was a 1960's movement in architecture. Actually I work in a building like that. It's incredibly ugly. Another "concrete architecture" building from the 1960s in my town was recently protected as a historic monument, because it is "a prime example of 'Betonbrutalismus' (concrete violence)", as they said. Here is a picture. And yes, we taxpayers pay to maintain this ugly piece of junk.
	Trifonov Fleisher Klaus Sokolov Zimmerman


Dewey	Nov 20 2012, 09:39 AM Post #159
HOLY CARP!!! Posts: 17,117 Group: Members Member #74 Joined: April 19, 2005	Are you suggesting that they should pull the plug on this building just for the utilitarian goal of saving taxpayers money?
	"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14


ivorythumper	Nov 20 2012, 09:57 AM Post #160
I am so adjective that I verb nouns! Posts: 50,666 Group: Members Member #164 Joined: April 24, 2005	John D'Oh Nov 20 2012, 04:54 AM I'd always assumed that concretism was a 1960's movement in architecture. Indeed -- they actually called themselves the New Brutalists. I knew Peter Smithson when I studied at Bath, which was a textbook brutalist campus.
	The dogma lives loudly within me.


John D'Oh	Nov 20 2012, 10:00 AM Post #161
MAMIL Posts: 53,812 Group: Members Member #276 Joined: October 19, 2005	The irony of living in such a beautiful city and having to attend that monstrosity.
	What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?


ivorythumper	Nov 20 2012, 10:04 AM Post #162
I am so adjective that I verb nouns! Posts: 50,666 Group: Members Member #164 Joined: April 24, 2005	Klaus Nov 20 2012, 09:14 AM John D'Oh Nov 20 2012, 04:54 AM I'd always assumed that concretism was a 1960's movement in architecture. Actually I work in a building like that. It's incredibly ugly. Another "concrete architecture" building from the 1960s in my town was recently protected as a historic monument, because it is "a prime example of 'Betonbrutalismus' (concrete violence)", as they said. Here is a picture. And yes, we taxpayers pay to maintain this ugly piece of junk. But seriously, Klaus -- that is the architecture of the modernist, functionalist, utilitarian world view. You decry it as ugly, but the whole modernist project refuses to admit of beauty as a transcendental value that resonates with a common human nature. Any appeal to "beauty", symmetry, formalism, hierarchical order, tradition, etc. in an architectural school is actually attacked as fascistic and totalitarian. It's ideological as well as pathological. It is an utter rejection of the human scale, the humane, and the human person as "imago dei". So when I discuss the consonances between these things, or oppose them with a classical anthropology and world view and epistemology, I am seeing massive and obvious patterns of mental habit that get applied variously to ethics, worldview, social organization and politics, arts and architecture, anthropology, etc. It all goes together, so it seems.
	The dogma lives loudly within me.


ivorythumper	Nov 20 2012, 10:05 AM Post #163
I am so adjective that I verb nouns! Posts: 50,666 Group: Members Member #164 Joined: April 24, 2005	John D'Oh Nov 20 2012, 10:00 AM The irony of living in such a beautiful city and having to attend that monstrosity. Indeed, fortunately I lived in the city and worked mostly from my flat.
	The dogma lives loudly within me.


Renauda	Nov 20 2012, 11:34 AM Post #164
HOLY CARP!!! Posts: 10,507 Group: Members Member #505 Joined: September 5, 2007	When I used to visit Moscow, I almost always stayed at the Leningradskaya Hotel, one of Moscow's seven sisters of Stalinist architecture. Beautiful hotel. I understand that it is now operated as a Hilton.



Klaus	Nov 20 2012, 12:41 PM Post #165
HOLY CARP!!! Posts: 19,403 Group: Members Member #350 Joined: May 21, 2006	Dewey Nov 20 2012, 09:39 AM Are you suggesting that they should pull the plug on this building just for the utilitarian goal of saving taxpayers money? The owner can do with it whatever he wants, but I reject the notion that this building has historical value and must be preserved. The proponents of the "historical monument" status claim that what we view as ugly today may be considered beautiful by future generations, hence this should not play a role in selecting buildings from an era. While I can see the rationale behind this statement, I still think that it is inherently ugly and unlikely to be appreciated by future generations.
	Trifonov Fleisher Klaus Sokolov Zimmerman


Dewey	Nov 20 2012, 12:45 PM Post #166
HOLY CARP!!! Posts: 17,117 Group: Members Member #74 Joined: April 19, 2005	Um...
	"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14


Klaus	Nov 20 2012, 12:47 PM Post #167
HOLY CARP!!! Posts: 19,403 Group: Members Member #350 Joined: May 21, 2006	ivorythumper Nov 20 2012, 10:04 AM But seriously, Klaus -- that is the architecture of the modernist, functionalist, utilitarian world view. You decry it as ugly, but the whole modernist project refuses to admit of beauty as a transcendental value that resonates with a common human nature. Any appeal to "beauty", symmetry, formalism, hierarchical order, tradition, etc. in an architectural school is actually attacked as fascistic and totalitarian. It's ideological as well as pathological. It is an utter rejection of the human scale, the humane, and the human person as "imago dei". So when I discuss the consonances between these things, or oppose them with a classical anthropology and world view and epistemology, I am seeing massive and obvious patterns of mental habit that get applied variously to ethics, worldview, social organization and politics, arts and architecture, anthropology, etc. It all goes together, so it seems. I think now you are mixing together a few things which should be kept separate. I for one have never heard anyone claim that classical architecture is "fascist" or "totalitarian". I have no doubt that you can find some link to somebody who makes that claim, but is this really a widespread position in architecture or just one or a few weirdos? But in any case I think that ones taste in architecture does not imply any ontological commitments of any sort. Are you also going to tell us that if I appreciate Grandma's roasted pork, then this is incompatible with a "modernist, functionalist, utilitarian world view"?
	Trifonov Fleisher Klaus Sokolov Zimmerman


ivorythumper	Nov 20 2012, 04:41 PM Post #168
I am so adjective that I verb nouns! Posts: 50,666 Group: Members Member #164 Joined: April 24, 2005	Klaus Nov 20 2012, 12:47 PM ivorythumper Nov 20 2012, 10:04 AM But seriously, Klaus -- that is the architecture of the modernist, functionalist, utilitarian world view. You decry it as ugly, but the whole modernist project refuses to admit of beauty as a transcendental value that resonates with a common human nature. Any appeal to "beauty", symmetry, formalism, hierarchical order, tradition, etc. in an architectural school is actually attacked as fascistic and totalitarian. It's ideological as well as pathological. It is an utter rejection of the human scale, the humane, and the human person as "imago dei". So when I discuss the consonances between these things, or oppose them with a classical anthropology and world view and epistemology, I am seeing massive and obvious patterns of mental habit that get applied variously to ethics, worldview, social organization and politics, arts and architecture, anthropology, etc. It all goes together, so it seems. I think now you are mixing together a few things which should be kept separate. I for one have never heard anyone claim that classical architecture is "fascist" or "totalitarian". I have no doubt that you can find some link to somebody who makes that claim, but is this really a widespread position in architecture or just one or a few weirdos? But in any case I think that ones taste in architecture does not imply any ontological commitments of any sort. Are you also going to tell us that if I appreciate Grandma's roasted pork, then this is incompatible with a "modernist, functionalist, utilitarian world view"? You evidently never went to architecture school. Doncha know there's a Nazi soldier behind every classical column? It is widespread -- and the Bauhaus and its progeny (Harvard GSD, Yale, IIT, Cornell, Berkeley, Architectural Association, plus all the second and third tier schools) eradicated the classical tradition from the curriculum (as opposed to the Beaux-Arts approach) and there were NO products of classicism or tradition until Venturi in the 1960s started with his Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture -- which treated classicism as an intellectual game. As for ontological commitment -- then you need a whole other explanation as to why all this ugly architecture is produced by proponents of radical functionalism, leftist socialism, utilitarianism, a strictly mechanistic world view, a complete rejection of the traditional approaches to society and the family and the human person, etc. Read virtually any of the mid century modernist -- Gropius, Le Corbusier, Giedion, Mies van der Rohe, -- they are all behavorists, politically hard Left, and utilitarians who invoke the myth of Progress (I know you'll probably accuse me of "labelism" again) or any of the deconstructivists -- Eisenman, Gehry, Holl, Koolhaus, Libeskind -- they are all essentially nihilists. The main issue here, Klaus, is that whenever the mind orders matter (as is the case in architecture above all) it imposes an essential world view on the form. This is why the Hellenistic mind produced an architecture different than the medieval mind than the Renaissance mind than the Baroque mind than the Modernist mind than the Post-Modern/ Deconstructivist mind. Architectural history is just a subset of the history of consciousness. Architects are always doing cosmology, anthropology and ontology. You can't escape it.
	The dogma lives loudly within me.


kenny	Nov 20 2012, 05:09 PM Post #169
HOLY CARP!!! Posts: 35,599 Group: Members Member #27 Joined: April 19, 2005	You two stop horsing around.



Renauda	Nov 20 2012, 05:27 PM Post #170
HOLY CARP!!! Posts: 10,507 Group: Members Member #505 Joined: September 5, 2007	ivorythumper Nov 20 2012, 04:41 PM Architects are always doing cosmology, anthropology and ontology. You can't escape it. It would seem they also engage in other self stimulating activities as well when others aren't watching.



AlbertaCrude	Nov 22 2012, 09:35 AM Post #171
Bull-Carp Posts: 9,641 Group: Members Member #116 Joined: April 22, 2005	See you later Renauda, you vulgar old utilitarian. Puerto Rican former boxer Hector "Macho" Camacho is clinically brain dead after being shot in the head on Tuesday, doctors say.



Axtremus	Nov 22 2012, 09:39 AM Post #172
HOLY CARP!!! Posts: 35,700 Group: Members Member #15 Joined: April 18, 2005	[off topic] Renauda 8012 posts + AlbertaCrude 8250 posts = 16262 posts. Dewey = 15713 posts Renauda + AlbertaCrude > Dewey in post count! [/off topic]



Dewey	Nov 22 2012, 09:47 AM Post #173
HOLY CARP!!! Posts: 17,117 Group: Members Member #74 Joined: April 19, 2005	It's all about word count, Ax.
	"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14


Klaus	Nov 22 2012, 12:38 PM Post #174
HOLY CARP!!! Posts: 19,403 Group: Members Member #350 Joined: May 21, 2006	Dewey Nov 22 2012, 09:47 AM It's all about word count, Ax. I'm sure you are glad it's not about information count (just kidding )
	Trifonov Fleisher Klaus Sokolov Zimmerman


apple	Nov 23 2012, 04:41 AM Post #175
one of the angels Posts: 21,162 Group: Moderators Member #24 Joined: April 19, 2005	Renauda Nov 20 2012, 11:34 AM When I used to visit Moscow, I almost always stayed at the Leningradskaya Hotel, one of Moscow's seven sisters of Stalinist architecture. Beautiful hotel. I understand that it is now operated as a Hilton. that is gorgeous.
	it behooves me to behold

Create your own social network with a free forum. Learn More · Sign-up Now
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
…
6
7