A stack of theses on the market confusion

[Veronic]

Originally Posted by Art-lover

very" understanding "in a philosophical environment remains an issue debated and murky confusion.

ie Are you implying that nobody really understands? or there are those enlightened few who managed? And you yourself who classifies himself to?

[Peter]

A work of art, there is a way of awakening the human soznaniya.Poznat it can not, as it is impossible to know any transcendental sostavlyayuschuyu.Kak not explain veru.Iskusstvo not explain it prompts to activity that is called the spirit of man, his creative nachalo.Iskusstvo carries a dualism ; material (manufacturing), but is addressed solely to the intangible form potrebleniya.Poetomu buying art, a person buys POSSIBILITY contemplation and aesthetic razmyshleniya.Myslyu (abstract), means exist, and this is what we differ from the rest of nature.

[Veronic]

Originally Posted by Art-lover

Acquisition of art for the sake of their utility or other perceivable qualities are ignoring the specificity of art objects, ie use them for other purposes.

Tell Art-lover, a painting in the church - it is utilitarian or not the quality of art (I mean the Catholic Church) and what role they take, in your opinion, are the days when they were created?

[NATA NOVA]

Originally Posted by Art-lover

I was beyond the idea that culture is largely rests on the "structure of default" that there are "inconceivably thin" objects which penetrate all the pores of the scientific (and apparently any other) Creativity, which are not reported publicly by the public, not decided to write. They are reported confidentially tete-a-tete, by word of mouth, and only one who "matured" to a certain level, who can himself ask elusive matter and take no clarifying, in the eyes of an outsider, "just merits" reply ".

(Georgy Guria. "Julius A. Danilov, as I knew him")

In other words (no buttons):
... "In other words," Culture "- this course, inconceivably difficult time for the verbal explanation and logical understanding permeates (on a subconscious level?) The act of creation and which internalize (?) Of the unwritten rules?
(Leah did not understand correctly?)

Added after 2 minutes

Originally Posted by Veronic

tell Art-lover, a painting in the church - is utilitarian or not the quality of art (I mean the Catholic Church) and which role they take, in your opinion, are the days when they were created ?

Veronique. when they were written, probably, and the concept of "art" was not (in the form in which we understand it)

Threat: I remembered that the Renaissance was called the Renaissance only 1846godu ... And with Renaissance Renaissance Renaissance is not called ...

[Jasmin]

Originally Posted by Art-lover

A work of art - a thing in itself, and if anyone thinks that he understands what a work of art, it is simply not aware of their misunderstanding.

   If I understand Art-lover, then we can compare the "misunderstanding" Art of "immersion" in the Kabbalah. These connoisseurs of Kabbalah (ie, the sages) is recommended to study thoroughly the Torah (Old Testament) at all levels (and there are several) before proceeding to the basics kabbalistiki, ie fully prepare for the highest wisdom. Popularizers (scammers) say: do not bother the Torah, and so we'll explain everything on the fingers - this is quite simple and accessible to all.
        To reach the level of "misunderstanding" Arts, it is necessary, for at least understand it. Moreover, the sages, they are also enlightened, they are also dedicated to believe that Kabbalah is not available to all, that is really so. For example, women, because of their psycho-physiological characteristics, serious "deepening" in Kabbalah is contraindicated, as are many men who have to do this, simply do not exist.

[SAH]

Originally Posted by Veronic

ie you implying that no one really does not understand?

This is a very old statement, philosophy, wisdom.

Added after 2 minutes

Originally Posted by Veronic

or there are those enlightened few who managed?

I think this is the answer to your question <!--~ a ~-->:

Originally Posted by Veronic

no one really does not understand

[Art-lover]

Originally Posted by Samvel

and yet interestingly, after a man old enough and knew what distinctive qualities it takes?

Typically, problems with social communication and headache. And yet - look at Ecclesiastes.

Originally Posted by Veronic

that is, Are you implying that nobody really understands? or there are those enlightened few who managed? And you yourself who classifies himself to?

Prsvetlennye not understand. His attitude to the world they define different shaped (vision, stay in the flow, etc.) - but always with the caveat that the words quality of enlightenment inexpressible. Understanding - a personal feeling. Enlightenment - the impersonal state.
In the enlightened state is not a number, a union am not a guru.

Originally Posted by Veronic

tell Art-lover, a painting in the church - is utilitarian or not the quality of art (I mean the Catholic Church) and which role they take, in your opinion, are the days when they were created ?

Veronic, you are not correctly formulated question. Nata you partially answered. The paintings in the church utilitarian.

Originally Posted by uriart

I got the impression that the ART-LOVER or enroll or make their own inferences.

I'm not recorded.
And I believe that a gentleman can take renal another gentleman only when he sleeps under the bunks another gentleman. Or if he is by profession uriolog.

Originally Posted by NATA NOVA

In other words (no buttons):
... "In other words," Culture "- this course, inconceivably difficult time for the verbal explanation and logical understanding permeates (on a subconscious level?) The act of creation and which internalize (?) Of the unwritten rules?
(Leah did not understand correctly?)

Somewhere in this direction. But no buttons to be unfastened. Seriously.


Ladies and gentlemen, if we understand everything today, what shall we do tomorrow? <!--~ A ~-->)
Good night.

[Самвел]

Originally Posted by Jasmin

recommend a thorough study the Torah (Old Testament) at all levels (and there are several),

It is impossible, you can get closer to understanding, and what individual chastey.Tozhe thing exists in Islam, which refers to a narrow group of people, and the masses, which is capable of only superficial knowledge, on the perception only of what physically. I've thought, but how many people die bankrupt?

[SAH]

Originally Posted by Samvel

It is quite impossible

A person is not possible, but with God all things are possible.

Originally Posted by Samvel

can closer to understand, and what the individual parts

We will be feasible to try.

[Тютчев]

Originally Posted by Art-lover

Learned the art of using mind = reduce it to the thinking processes. It is conceptually, but this focus is not without cheating.

And what, actually, deception? If you believe that "learned the art of using mind=reduce it to the thinking processes, then please explain," with "any other processes, if we exclude" thinking ", we can comprehend the art? What are these processes, please. Very interesting ...

Originally Posted by Art-lover

very "understanding" in a philosophical environment remains an issue debated and murky confusion. What is not understood by all. And there are different traditions of interpretation of the nature of the concept. However, the forum will collapse under the burden of any initiative to correct deployment of the concept of the concept. And similar initiatives are punishable misunderstanding, disrespect and unread.

In the "philosophical environment" much-debated issue. The question of "understanding" is not the most complex and confusing one. Why scare people "with darkness of misunderstanding", the complexity of the issue and "collapse" forum? In fact, it is not so scary, but notions of "understanding" is spreading in the development of philosophy, psychology and linguistics. And since you are my first and main thesis was built using this concept, the clarification of this issue I can see a key and logical in this topic.
You claim that an understanding of art and perception of it by thinking (which, in essence, the same thing) is not possible or limited. I maintain that thinking - it is a fundamental process (ie, without comprehension impossible) to comprehend a work of art man. (Understanding - it forms a component of thinking and therefore can not be separated from him)

Originally Posted by Art-lover

"Understanding art as a process" - Ok, with emphasis on non finito. "Everything will fall into place" somewhere in the infinity, where the knot tied parallel lines.
 

Understand - this is a process. And nothing else it can not be. Process unconditionally. When you say that you "understand", it means that you are involved in a certain thinking process. A result of a process, not necessarily understood subject in its entirety.

Originally Posted by Art-lover

Well, I do not know how to comprehend a work of art. With reverence I look at those who know: I think that they are able to fully understand God - "as a spiritual phenomenon."

I am very apologetic, but how do you get that from? This nonsense I wrote. And there is nothing similar in meaning to what you have written is not asserted. I wrote this:

Originally Posted by Tjutchev

"Understanding the works of art" must be regarded as process, and then everything will fall into place. If you perceive the content of works of art as a spiritual phenomena, then you hereby fully comprehended it. This is the idea of his understanding.

And it has another meaning.

Originally Posted by ranzher

... and the aesthetic effect of the work is perceived by us directly through the sense of avoiding the speculative logic of construction.

That's about it, please, more. It's very interesting to understand ...