Sunday, June 27, 2004


one of the prevailing notions around is the one which has emotions pitted against thinking... this is to say the idea that if a work is examined, the emotions of it evaporate... rubbish... a human being is a biological being - meaning that a person is as inherently integrated within itself as is any other biological being... it has to be, else it could not long survive... an emotion, far from being an opposite to reason, is actually a result, a consequence, an effect of a person"s reasoning or lack of... every person has a capacity to emote, and certainly does - as said, it is the consequence of neural organization - but WHAT the particular emotion is expressedtowards is dependent on something else, the degree of use of the rational faculty of the person... since emotions are as such EFFECTUAL relationships, to understand the emotions, a person must be come aware of the reasons underscoring those emotional reactions... otherwise, the artist's result - the rendering - has no choice but to be haphazard and inconsistant, depending on the degree involved of the awareness of that underscoring reason... why is that? has to do with the fact that reason has two basic functions - cognitive [discovering what things are], and evaluative [discovering the relationship of things to oneself in terms of beneficial or harmful]... what an emotion does is to provide a very quick appraisal of this beneficial/harmful - ness... it is a value-response, a psychosomatic form in which is experienced this beneficial/harmful estimate of some aspect of reality to oneself... furthermore, it is based on the context of the person's knowledge and values [or lack of them] - that is, the reasoning faculty...

No comments: