Re: art&science

Date: Sat Apr 22 2000 - 05:39:59 MDT


Unfortunately I'm still not aware of extropian art.

But, in my opinion, art and science and existence itself (and
mathematics, but here I'm not sure) are self-generated organs of a
self-synthesized information system. Reference: J.A. Wheeler, At
Home in the Universe, the Am. Inst. of Physics, 1992, p. 308. I do
not like the term self-generated organ, I prefer self-generated form
or self-generated expression, any way...

Along this path the <purpose of art> question is a bit less
important. Note that purpose is often linked to progress. But the
art, as any other qualitative or philosophical expression, can not
progress, in the long run.

The question <what is the purpose of a self-synthesized
information system> looks meaningless since that purpose is
deeply spread, deeply rooted in that system.

But, for sure, each true work of art is creation, exhibition, testimony,
durable information, enjoyment and (in spectator's mind)
re-creation. And possibly is the fastest way to reveal the s.c.
partecipatory universe.

J.A.Wheeler calls partecipatory universe this development
process: (creation?) > universe > matter > mankind > mind >
knowledge of universe > (extropy?) > ultimate information >

Note that if Wheeler (and Hawking) seems to like (and believe in)
the ultimate knowledge of universe idea, Einstein (and F.J. Dyson
and T. Regge) did not like, at all, the definitive information
approach. Einstein wrote <Da koennt’ mir halt der liebe Gott leid
tun>. From the unending information (and knowledge) process
and from the (structural and logical) infinity of universe T. Regge
gets the freedom of man. (More extropian spaces!).

But let me ask: is art a sort of unconscious representation, or a
sort of desperate anticipation of that partecipatory universe?

Right, wrong, foolish?

Rome (Italy)

Good Easter everybody!

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:09:41 MDT