Sarah says:
>> Dale Earnhardt is 3 without 3-nes
>> it has nothing to do with math or a reference to an amount
>> and the ESPN film "3" only refers to this race car driver
>> no numbers
>> no 2+1
>> just a driver who got famous and crashed into a wall
>>
>
> Yes, but I think the point is that 3 does not exist without content of some
> kind. Dale Earnhardt is the content; he is the "threeness" for this instance
> of the form of 3, even though there aren't three of anything.
>
> (That said, I'm not even sure if there is actually a consensus on whether
> number is pure form or whether it not really some sort of self-sufficent
> concept...the concept of three is readily imaginable without it predicating
> anything...whereas the concept of, say, a sonnet is impossible to think of
> outside the context of a poem. Anyone feel free to correct me here...)
>
Yes, Sarah, but 'sonnet' is conceivable without reference to a concrete
sonnet, in the same way a sonata is conceivable without reference to or
predication of an actual sonata; composers in both poetry and music (like
myself...), not to mention mathematicians are always thinking form; I can
hear, no, divine/think, a sonata quite apart from the sounds that reach my
ear or the symbols that meet my eye (via-a-vis a score) and makes sense of
the fact that I *can* call it, recognise and thus hear a "sonata". This is
partly the extraordinary nature of language (not just 'natural language',
also the languages of art, music, mathematics and of course, film. The
actual sonnets, sonatas and object multiplicities (for example) are then
instantiations of the forms. The form is not an instance. No?
regards
michaelP
*
*
Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon.
After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are replying to.
To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask]
For help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon.
**
|