JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for PHD-DESIGN Archives


PHD-DESIGN Archives

PHD-DESIGN Archives


PHD-DESIGN@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

PHD-DESIGN Home

PHD-DESIGN Home

PHD-DESIGN  September 2018

PHD-DESIGN September 2018

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: A Scientist Speaks on Beauty

From:

Ken Friedman <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 11 Sep 2018 16:16:07 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (34 lines)

Dear Friends,

The comments on beauty and science have interested me — I see the virtue in many of these viewpoints.

My purpose in posting Richard Feynman’s comment was that I was puzzled and irked by the notion that scientists do not understand beauty. If I were prepared to make a long, detailed post, I could offer a great many examples — not of scientists creating or producing beauty, but rather of scientists understanding beauty much as any artist, musician, or dancer does. To say that scientists employ beauty and elegance as a criterion in their evaluation of ideas is different than saying scientists *create* beauty. While the scientists or mathematicians creating a theory may wish to create something beautiful, I was describing the reception and understanding  of beauty by scientists and mathematicians appreciating the beauty of work by *other* scientists and mathematicians.

This week, I am on a quick visit to relatives in New York City and New London, Connecticut. In the early 1800s, New London was the third most important whaling port in the world. We’re staying about a ten minute walk from a now-nonexistent childhood home built by a retired sea captain who shipped out with Yankee rock for ballast and returned from many voyages with hardwood ballast from which he built our home. As we drive around, I look at historic houses from the Federalist era — a style of architecture that always appealed to me. Others prefer other styles. I am dedicated to several schools of architecture from several nations and cultures … There are many kinds of beauty and many ways to understand them.

In reading that scientists have a problem understanding beauty, I was put off by what I saw as an inaccurate and simplistic comment.

I liked Jerry’s St. Thomas recap, and I appreciated Susan attempt at a summary. Earlier, Susan mentioned Clement Greenberg. To me, Greenberg is a perfect example of someone who did and did not understand beauty. His 1961 book Art and Culture is a brilliant, beautifully written discussion of contemporary art from a man who was perceptive — and an authoritarian, narrow view of art written by a man who limited in vision because he was locked into a view of the world from his own time and place. It’s hard for me to see Jackson Pollock or Willem de Kooning among the great artists of the 20th century — they might be, but I don’t see it, bot on the level of the French modern monsters with whom Greenberg ranks them. And there is no way that I would place the enthusiasms of the aging Greenberg on the level he placed them — for example, the Color Field painters like Jules Olitski and Kenneth Noland. So let’s say this is all opinion about how we understand beauty. Why would anyone say that Clement Greenberg knows more about beauty, say, than Richard Feynman or Eric Kandel. Of course, Kandel has more sympathy for de Kooning and Pollock than I do, so perhaps he and Greenberg are right while I lack understanding.

At any rate, I was not talking about *creating* beauty, but understanding it. That’s what caught my eye. 

If we talk about *creating* beauty, I’d have to think yet again. Even so, I’ll go out on a limb here to say that Kurt Gödel was better able to create beauty than Kenneth Noland. Noland made pleasant paintings that fit the market in a certain time. If you look at them today, you see a kind of relic of the era. Gödel thought deeply to create beautiful ideas that reverberate still, and remain as lively and enchanting as they ever were. Gödel, like Pablo Picasso, Ludwig Wittgenstein, or Emily Dickinson, was a giant figure of modern culture whose work sheds light on what it is to be human. Noland exemplifies what Marcel Duchamp meant when he make jokes about retinal painting, art painted by someone whom Duchamp would label “dumb like a painter.” 

To me, Clement Greenberg’s enthusiasm for the color painters says that something was missing in Greenberg’s understanding of beauty. Greenberg’s theory of art overwhelmed his ability to see and to understand.

But what do I know?  

Yours,

Ken

Ken Friedman, Ph.D., D.Sc. (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | 设计 She Ji. The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Tongji University in Cooperation with Elsevier | URL: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-design-economics-and-innovation/

Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| Email [log in to unmask] | Academia http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn 


-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list  <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager