aesthetics = mere appearance?

I am not sure whether I can do the intensive reading necessary to make my comments worth anything at all.  I am listening to a podcast about Nietzsche – there is a remark about ‘pure appearance’ which is appreciated without regard to any other underlying reality.  How can I say anything about this?

the podcast is The Partially Examined Life, episode 119

appearance = illusion but an illusion which is to be taken seriously

they talk about dreaming

I am reminded of Tom Davis Unask:

when he argues for the utter importance of dreaming (illusion, fiction?)

dreaming is amoral

but if we don’t dream, we die

does dreaming enable man to claim his rights (woman to claim her rights)

I  think I have to read the original Nietzsche and Kant closely

Is the process of making ‘art’ like dreaming in any way?

If so, how would Berger assess it?

ps I have to remember the essay? about connotations and references in language being boundless and …..

hope that jogs!  I know it will be on the other laptop in a folder -look

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s