Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'works', 'Looking for Spinoza' and 'Introduction to Aesthetics'

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     specify just one area for these texts


4 ideas

15. Nature of Minds / C. Capacities of Minds / 10. Conatus/Striving
Conatus is brain circuits seeking survival and well-being [Damasio]
     Full Idea: Conatus is explicable as the aggregate of dispositions laid down in brain circuitry that seeks both survival and well-being.
     From: Antonio Damasio (Looking for Spinoza [2003], p.36)
     A reaction: So conatus is the motivation of my inner personal assistant, who reminds me what I am doing later today. I like the mention of dispositions, hence powers.
21. Aesthetics / B. Nature of Art / 6. Art as Institution
The institutional theory says only a competent expert can decree something to be an art work [Dickie, by Gardner]
     Full Idea: Dickie's institutional theory of art says that something is a work of art if and only if it has had that status conferred on it by a competent member of the artworld.
     From: report of George Dickie (Introduction to Aesthetics [1997], Ch.8) by Sebastian Gardner - Aesthetics 3.1
     A reaction: The idea that a single 'competent' person can do this sounds daft, and probably circular. A consensus in the artworld sounds more plausible, but this still leaves the revolutionary genius, who - in retrospect - produced unrecognised 'art'.
29. Religion / B. Monotheistic Religion / 4. Christianity / d. Heresy
Philosophers are the forefathers of heretics [Tertullian]
     Full Idea: Philosophers are the forefathers of heretics.
     From: Tertullian (works [c.200]), quoted by Robert Pasnau - Metaphysical Themes 1274-1671 20.2
29. Religion / D. Religious Issues / 1. Religious Commitment / e. Fideism
I believe because it is absurd [Tertullian]
     Full Idea: I believe because it is absurd ('Credo quia absurdum est').
     From: Tertullian (works [c.200]), quoted by Robert Fogelin - Walking the Tightrope of Reason n4.2
     A reaction: This seems to be a rather desperate remark, in response to what must have been rather good hostile arguments. No one would abandon the support of reason if it was easy to acquire. You can't deny its engaging romantic defiance, though.