1. For each video and article list/discuss the key concepts you learned.
Carta video- I learned a lot of different things in this video. most concepts I did already know but there were a few things I heard for the first time. the word "schematization" I hadn't heard until this video.
Philosophy of the arts video- again I was familiar with a lot of the concepts from prior classes. I knew about the different styles or art and artists but the philosophy concept taught me many different things I didn't know prior.
article- I found the article gave me a lot of insight about what we see, it gave me a different way to look at things. Because they broke down things that we don't even think about, like lines for example.
Philosophy of the arts video- again I was familiar with a lot of the concepts from prior classes. I knew about the different styles or art and artists but the philosophy concept taught me many different things I didn't know prior.
article- I found the article gave me a lot of insight about what we see, it gave me a different way to look at things. Because they broke down things that we don't even think about, like lines for example.
2. Which philosopher's theory on aesthetics do you feel is most important? Be sure to mention the philosopher's name, era (time in history), and contribution to the aesthetic theory in your response.
I thought all the theories mentioned made some very good points and very interesting ways of seeing things. I found plato (4th century) view on aesthetics most important. Although I disagree completely on his view on poetry not being art. He had one quote that I admired a lot " there is a beauty by which all things are beautiful". I enjoyed the concept he used about "ideas". The example they used in the video is when you draw a triangle you are not creating a triangle but a perfect copy of the idea of a triangle.
3. What do you think about Changeux and Ramachandran scientific view of aesthetics and art? What was the most interesting fact you discovered from each speakers lecture?
I found them very interesting, Ramachandran more so. I learn many things from these lectures but most importantly I learned about vision and how we see things. He showed an image of a Dalmatian dog in black and white that just looks like a series of splotches. Our brain links the splotches together, then the brain is "groping for a solution" its trying to put together what it sees.
I found them very interesting, Ramachandran more so. I learn many things from these lectures but most importantly I learned about vision and how we see things. He showed an image of a Dalmatian dog in black and white that just looks like a series of splotches. Our brain links the splotches together, then the brain is "groping for a solution" its trying to put together what it sees.
4.How do the videos and article relate to the readings in the text?
I had already seen the videos and read the articles before reading the text and I found it very helpful to have this knowledge prior. The references they made in the video coincide with the text from the book.
5. What is your opinion of the films and article? How do they add depth to understanding of the topics in your reading in the text?
The Carta video, the first speaker was very hard to understand, not only the thick accent but the audio quality . The second speaker I enjoyed much more, he was humorous I could understand him and he used visuals to help his lectures. I liked the Philosophy of arts video and found it much more enjoyable then the first one. I learned a lot about the philosopher's and there philosophy's. I really enjoyed all the art they showed as well. I found the article to be very interesting, it reinforced the ideas from the text and from the videos.
No comments:
Post a Comment