Stoicism & Aesthetics
I am curious about how different forms of stoicism approach aesthetics in general given the common disposition being somewhat oppositional to hedonism?
Obviously, I am not stating that aesthetic appreciation is wholly a 'hedonistic' mindset but it seems to be more apparent in hedonistic ideologies than in stoic ones, right?
Anyway, broad topic. What input and reading recommendation do you have?
Thanks
Obviously, I am not stating that aesthetic appreciation is wholly a 'hedonistic' mindset but it seems to be more apparent in hedonistic ideologies than in stoic ones, right?
Anyway, broad topic. What input and reading recommendation do you have?
Thanks
Comments (15)
I found this on 'Aesthetics': https://www.britannica.com/topic/aesthetics
Stoicism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoicism
As far as I understand, aesthetic appreciation is open to all humans, no matter their ideology. It's a synthesis of sense and intellect. We look, see, feel and judge works of art or nature, no matter whether they are ugly or beautiful.
An interesting OP. Much more can be said :smile:
Right, so perhaps a stoic finds meaning in the understanding of works of art, whereas a hedonist finds meaning in being attracted, surprised, provoked etc by works of art. Therefore, it might matter for the hedonist whether a work is ugly or beautiful or at least interesting.
Perhaps. I don't know. There are so many different kinds of people attracted to different types of either system of belief. Does it help to know what philosophical Hedonism means ? 6 types identified here:
https://iep.utm.edu/hedonism/
Again, 'works of art' - creative expression of any type is meaningful for different reasons. It can cause pain or pleasure - Jeezy peeps, that hurts my eyes/ears - that blows my mind...God, thank you for the world in all its glory and challenges. I'll paint the roof in appreciation.
For me, an 'aesthetic appreciation' can be at any level and is not necessarily '-ism' dependent.
Usually, an understanding, deeper meaning comes after the immediate impact on the senses.
This can involve how 'passionate' we are about the object or our aims. A hedonist might simply aim to please self at the expense of others. A stoic might want to reign in the passions so as to live a balanced life. It depends.
Well, why didn't you say so! :roll: :smile: Will read later...
My understanding is that Hedonism was the original Stoicism. That is, Stoicism branched off from Hedonistic thinking - hedonists coming to the understanding of temperance as preserving the most long lasting 'pleasure' rather than drowning in excesses.
I do actually think one must dip into excesses to know where the optimal positioning is.
How this relates to aesthetics though is something I feel is important but it has not registered properly in any rational sense.
OK. You could also say that we are all hedonists but that doesn't preclude having a stoic attitude.
We can seek pleasure at the same time as seeing importance of wellbeing and ways to reach optimal state for self.
Historical relationships and influences:
Quoting Hedonism
More to say later...it's sunny out...:cool:
Edit: Quoting I like sushi
Say more? Perhaps we need to talk to Plato (see above)...
As for Plato's work about 'a wild drunken party where all the best philosophers gather to discuss the pleasures of love'. Well. Assuming this is the Symposium, this isn't a correct depiction. For sure, some drink would have been present, it's a banquet. However, I think Socrates - as the only philosopher present - encouraged other participants, eminent men to take turn in giving a series of speeches on eros. Each arguing their perspective, as in in a competition.
Quoting IEP - Epicurus
So, a different connotation from the modern. He advocated a simple, moderate life. Excess leads to pain. Pleasure is the absence of troubles to mind and body.
Another of Plato's dialogues - the Philebus - is concerned with whether pleasure or reason and wisdom are the good.
Quoting Wiki - Philebus
So, it is not a case of one or the other. It is the source of pleasure that counts. The life of the mind can give pleasure - as at TPF - working through the pain pricks as we try to understand.
I think reading the Symposium can provide an 'aesthetic experience' - being there a blast! :party:
I don't know much about stoicism, but I thought this might be of interest. It's from "The Principles of Art" by R.G. Collingwood.
Right, art became an off-shoot from crafts, like philosophy became an off-shoot from science.
Some contemporary art is craft-like, and some contemporary philosophy is practiced scientifically. But there's a lot of art without craft (replaced by concepts, originality, fame etc), and there's a lot of philosophy practiced like literature (some being critical or hostile to science).
What might the ancient stoics say about modern concept art? A modern stoic?
I think you have gotten that backwards ;)
Probably something related to kalos or some thread of beauty/harmony. It is clear they understood beauty in craft, so they may well not have had a specific word for Art but certainly had enough terms to talk of it how we do.
Well, philosophy used to be the name for science, recall. The off-shoots from this old sense of science are the special sciences and philosophy in their modern senses. Likewise, the modern sense of 'art' is an off-shoot from an older and more inclusive sense of crafts.
Quoting I like sushi
They could, but modern art, especially concept art, is often context-dependent, whereas the meanings of craft manifest in the works.