Founded in 2018 as a long form conversation on the classical arts, myths, and philosophy, Cave of Apelles is meant to inspire people to participate in eternity. It has its name from Apelles, the greatest ancient painter and a source of inspiration to titans like Rembrandt, Velasquez and Odd Nerdrum.
Culture is downstream from philosophy. We are devoted to spreading the message.
Пікірлер
Just to clarify - Stephen Hicks means 'the latter part of the 1700s' not 1800s, when he is talking about David Hume.
Just bought my copy today. I have a Barnes & Noble literally a minute drive from my work. Drove straight there to buy my copy, and I’m immensely excited to dig into it.
Is there a way to communicate with Mr. Freckeus?
46:00 About the Sublime: “I am sick of hearing of the sublimity of Milton” - Mary Wollstonecraft, "Thoughts on the Education of Daughters", 1787 This was written 3 good years before Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason", which should make anyone pause to rethink whether the Sublime really rose to prominence after 1790 because of an obscure philosophy book by a difficult philosopher. As it is, recent historians have done a lot to correct this misview; i can point out two studies: Caroline van Eck (ed), "The Early Modern Reception and Dissemination of Longinus’ Peri Hupsous in Rhetoric, the Visual Arts, Architecture and the Theatre" Thomas Matthew Vozar, "Abstracted Sublimities: Milton, Longinus and the Sublime in the Seventeenth Century" And recently, Kevin Killeen in "The Unknowable In Early Modern Thought" has suggested that the idea of the sublime is indissociable from the rise of science and of the use of scientific instruments such as the microscope and the telescope, whose radical dissolutions of human senses of scale have trained humans to look at nature with renewed awe. This is highly ironic, to think that the Sublime, seemingly so irrational, is the product of the pursuit of reason. But then again, any 17c sceptic like Pierre Bayle could have told you that reason, taken too far, turns upon itself: “It [reason] is a guide that lads one astray; and philosophy can be compared to some powders that are so corrosive that, after they have eaten away the infected flesh of the wound, they then devour the living flesh, rot the bones, and penetrate to the very marrow. Philosophy at first refutes errors. But if it is not stopped at this point, it goes on to attack truths. And when it is left on its own, it goes so far that it no longer knows where it is and can find no stopping place.” (Bayle) This is one of the great ironies (and tragedies, if you're so inclined) of modernity; that the reason which Mr. Hick puts on a pedestal, the reason that led to his beloved Enlightenment, also has this dark side that causes contrary consequences. This messiness is the essence of history. Unfortunately, Mr. Hicks shows no interest in understanding the history of ideas in this wonderful maze of unforeseen side effects; he's only concerned with (1) controversially pegging Kant with irrationalism and (2) making him a forerunner of "postmodernism". This is simply the culture wars; it's about making bad history to darken his enemies. There's no intention to actually provided disinterested, specialized information.
Most of the tenets of her Objectivism have been kind of flatten by quantum physics and the role of consciousness in the fabric of reality. I find her ideals more like an egocentric trip than anything else. Plus just look around and see what capitalism has done for the world… we are just cooking the planet with the 1% laughing to the bank🙄
I hate to say it, but what a bunch of reactionary dorks these people are.
This is so painfully familiar. Kristin is laughing and being coy about it, but this sort of public, directed hatred and bullying at a young age can really destroy a person and literally drive them to suicide. Something very similar happened to me when I went to art school. It almost brings me to tears listening to her account.
Honestly I can only listen to Odd and Tuv, they are revealing their heartfelt thoughts and opinions. Hicks sounds like a polished summary of a Wikipedia page. He is about as interesting and original as ChatGPT.
I have been unimpressed with modern architecture for years but I assumed that I was just old fashioned and not cool or modern minded . Now through videos like this I realise that modern architecture realy is tasteless brutalist and anti-beauty and I was right all the time . Wonderful to see taste and beauty is being re-awakened .
Stephen Hicks is a glorious example of a non-specialist parroting an idea well known to specialists (art has stagnated more or less since the 1910s) but blaming it on narrow, politicized scapegoats in a way that no serious specialist would make. The idea that, deep down, Kant alone is to blame, is an unhistorical fantasy. In this sense, he's just the conservative Mark Fisher, who also argues that culture has stagnated, except the Marxist Fisher blames capitalism. If you're tired of reductive cultural warriors and truly want an education, a more complex, nuanced, comprehensive explanation of this phenomenon can be found in Jacques Barzun's 1973 book "The Use and Abuse of Art". it's very short but packs a lot of info.
Very good thought process of higher band width and bringing to reality too.!!!
Sounds like neo paganism.
you damn people read her with open mind , and you will gonna be fan of her
These knuckleheads laugh at something that was meant to be a joke.
The Hyperboreans were Iranic, not Germanic. The ancient Germanic culture was a neighbor to the Hyperboreans, but they were not Hyperboreans. When the climate became hostile, as attested to in the Avesta, the Aryans moved south. Some eventually went into the area that we call India today. After they were gone, Finno-Ugaric groups moved in, some of them became the Sami.
"If it is against reason, it is sinful."- Saint Thomas Aquinas 13th century. Human rights and individualism arose with the church's rejection of cousin marriage and this led to the end of tribalism and the idea of the "person" which literally means "voice sounding through". and Catholic natural law which is literally the preamble to the US Constitution. Catholic universities spread Socratic realism and reason which flowered into the "enlightenment" and modern science like at the U of Paris and Bologna. Catholicism really built the west. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_the_Catholic_Church
"So, tell me more about your hobbies". His answer:
did he just refer to the raft of the medusa as a delacroix?😅
Power cut then
What is all this? The devil was there when adam and Eve were in the garden of eden.
The Egyptian portraits he's talking about are Fayum portraits made under Roman rule, in the first few centuries CE. They don't represent a deviation of style within traditional Egyptian representational work, which was fairly constant for 3,000 years.
Michelangelo’s most well-known works are, in their subject matter, based on the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament. To simply say he was copying the Greeks is what the moderns call a “hot take.”
Who the hell would say that their own dad is the best painter ever? That's hilarious
The antiphoto angle is ahistorical. Photography is only "a copy machine" if the artist treats it that way. I encourage you to look at how Gauguin, Degas, and Delacroix used photography. Of course many of the Old Masters, Baroque, and Neoclassical painters used optical and measuring devices, and once photography came on the scene, nearly all of the greats referenced it or worked from it in some way or another. Start here: "The Painter and the Photograph: From Delacroix to Warhol," and then here: "Shared Intelligence: American Painting and the Photograph."
Aye, nice work doc. Kant was the Albedo of the Magnum Opus of Plastic Reality. He trashed understanding. Vouched for his philosophy with Ethics and Morality. Turned Aesthetics into a mind job... Good discussion, fellas.
I generally side with this philosophy and enjoy that this platform exists, but I have a question: What would happen if support for the talent to produce realism came to dominate in the coming years and suddenly we had complete reversal from what happened at the peak of the Art era? I'm not sure if a drastic increase in the amount of realism that already floods my instagram bubble would be a good thing. I mean, it gave me so much purpose to pursue realism when it was even less common than the beginning of the social media. It "makes us look good" by comparison to be surrounded by people doing finger-paintings?
This was great, thanks for sharing!
Did he say: "Invisible Art"? Who put the "CON" in conceptual art?~!
Take your pick.
Tusen takk ❤
This video is painful to watch. Stephen Hicks completely misunderstands Kant. The irony is that he would actually agree with Kant, if only he understood him. Kant believes in objective morality (categorical imperative) and objective reality (noumena/phenomena). Hicks basically thinks Kant is Nietzsche, which is ironic because Hicks famously hates Nietzsche (and Nietzsche hated Kant).
Read the Kant's 2nd Preface to *Critique of Pure Reason*, in which Kant goes out of his way to say explicitly and repeatedly that objectivity must be rejected. Read the second half of the *Groundwork of Metaphysics of Morals*, in which Kant says explicitly and repeatedly that the CI cannot be objectively grounded and must be taken on faith and/or as a mere regulative idea. Do not confuse Kant's hoped-for universality with objectivity.
@@StephenHicksPhilosopher Kant is a transcendental idealist, his philosophy is that we get as close to objective phenomenal truth as possible. Whether it’s noumenally true is irrelevant. Your argument is that he’s not making the metaphysical, but rather phenomenological, assertion. But this doesn’t disprove his claims on objectivity, just that it’s not metaphysical. What’s worse is that Hegel rejects this and argues we CAN understand the noumena. So modern philosophy is predicated on transcendental idealism’s assertion of objectivity, whether it be phenomenally in the case of Kant, or noumenally in the case of Hegel. Post modernists reject both thinkers, because they disagree on objective truth entirely. So I repeat, Kant and Hegel are complete ideological opponents to Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, who inspired the post modern tradition. You really don’t know what you’re talking about, it’s embarrassing.
@@aidanm.655 : You're repeating the same mistake in your very first sentence here -- mis-using "objective" in a way Kant explcitly disavows. You need to re-cast the rest of your reconstruction once you get the fundamental terminology straight. Bxvi is precisely the section you must read carefully and integrate the terminology of "object" and "subject" Kant uses there.
The brain is a wildly powerful computer of sorts… just dont ever consider it its ability for pattern recognition. All that…. Must be cast aside. No patterns outside of your daily march to the mines, the return to your pod, and the eating of your bugs. Patterns. Are racist. Architecture is a hoax. Art is the toilet that I’m sitting on right now.
I have found my kin. Thank god, and the gods above, that these people and ideals and centers of exploration… still exist.
Brutalist architecture- Bourne from a movement populated by communists. No wonder were told by our national museums that paintings of rolling hillsides “evoke dark nationalist feelings” It appears the commies are correct about this. Don’t want people embracing heritage, culture, common foundations, history or nation? Well then adorn their classical works of art with disclaimers that only nazis like the English countryside and remove their genetic memory from existence by replacing the locations of their heritage with structures that assault the senses. Thus, our grandchildren will never know any different. To them, the brown masses plodding through centuries within dreary sameness, free of any uniqueness that threaten their multicultural inclusivity… will be the world their fathers inhabited. And their great great grandparents before them. They won’t know things were ever any different. Just like today we aren’t meant to know things could ever be different. The grey world of boxes is the real world- the world of classical beauty is just a fascist myth.
And thus, Henry Ford was the problem. Which is a conclusion I refuse to accept.
No, no… I need someone to point me to this interview, or the peoples names. Please. For the sake of all things hyperborean Edit: Nevermind, I forgot I know how to internets.
so what books did he reccommend?
Such an interesting interview, with a wonderful painter who has learned how to be lighthearted and continue....I've also seen the full spectrum available in art education, but was fortunate enough to attend an Academy where two different personalities were strong and present. One painting master focused on very formal techniques, another great teacher concentrated on gestural work and individual development. But the shared personal values: concentration on drawing skills, the need to work from life, and knowledge of materials and methods- were always present with both mentors. My first art school experience had been also at a University, and I'd always felt cheated by my time there until I'd heard Kristine's story. At least I'd received a bit more attention and instruction, but not enough to satisfy. Many times I was alone at the end of a three-hour studio class along with one or two other students (at least 30 had been at the start)--the professor absent after the first half-hour...a situation which I could never have imagined in my later Academy years. Staying for a reason had helped- even at University, I'd connected with a graduate teaching fellow who was an interesting and diligent painter. We'd formed a sort of small community with one another, and shared ideas and knowledge in the way I'd later come to know as typical of Academy approach. I'm so glad to have this reminder, through the interview, that it's important to keep working even when an educational situation isn't settling well. Continue to learn from every new situation. Search for the new situation if the current one doesn't satisfy. ...and when I'd had renewed contact with an Art Department where teachers encouraged students to "learn painting by practicing on oak tag (cheap board)", and to use student-grade paints because they're less expensive... I was there to suggest that it's not a good idea to grow accustomed to inferior materials. Or inferior methods. ... it's always possible to draw. That seems to be the beginning and end for me, no matter how much else I've learned along the way. Drawing is the core skill in all visual arts, and is available for everyone who wants to become a better painter. Begin with the best, and it will carry you a very long way.
One must always remember that the human brain is what is experiencing and filtering - and that the male mind is asymmetrical, and the female mind is symmetrical . So the male will actually become energized by symmetry , and the feminine will -- for example, more likely enjoy a male with his hair parted to the side , than down the middle, and a male will more likely enjoy a female with her hair parted down the middle . In my opinion , the male female conversation has been totally ruined during the last 100 years , and is the primary place of therapeutic healing that needs to be brought into EVERY conversation . If it is not , it will come into the conversation through the back door , or worse , through the chimney !
Believe me there is a reason why the messengers of Dystopia all work VERY hard at dressing and coiffing and sculpting their physiques to maintain serious contact with the masses . Beauty is a primary memetic connector , which can be used as a Trojan horse of content . To me , beauty is balance in motion . Pretty is balance , beauty is something that is so perfectly balanced that it can be moved by a feather .
how can someone say there is no craft to cubism as practiced by Picasso that is absurd. how can someone say there has been no new art ideas since Duchamp in the teens that is absolutely absurd.
The most important part of the story of I1 probably involves I2. I2 is probably Cro Magnon (Early Modern European). Either I1 or I2 seem to be the population in whom the D-allele emerged that is connected to microcephalin regulation - brain size. That gene surfed to high frequency quickly, meaning it conferred an advantage of some kind. More important is the fact that Cro Magnon's larger body and brain (compared to either Neanderthals or Homo Sapiens of the time) came from something called _hybrid vigor,_ and millennia later, when the 5'10" Yamnaya came in and made babies with the daughters of I1, it looks like these hitherto separate populations enjoyed another bump of hybrid vigor, resulting in the Vikings. I1s are all over the world, but still remain mostly where they started, in Scandinavia. That suggests to me that what ever drove the Yamnaya to invade and colonize Europe, it may have been somehow linked to y-DNA rather than autosomal DNA. If that's the case, then the term "colonizer" would be a poor fit for I1 males, lol. That's probably asking too much from the data, but it would be hysterically funny to me if proven. I'm an I1 male but stand 5'10".
Yeah and the khoisan came from south america
*It takes personal revelation to finally believe that the world is real in an empirical way.*
Have more kids.
Wonderful set. Wonderful poncho.
Please. The poncho looks ridiculous. I'm all for individualism, but just think what wearing that hideous outfit says about one's intellectual seriousness. I certainly won't be coming back to this channel. (Yeah, call me superficial, but life is short and time is precious, and I don't have enough of it to waste on finding out whether this guy is worth listening to or not, so I'm happy to go with first impressions. He happened to have an interviewee that I was familiar with and interested in, only reason I clicked.)
I have read in the translated work of Papus about a fair skin tribe moving into India and creating a cast system.....😢...The story was that this tribe has separated from their own group due to the Matriarchal rules...so they came to India and creating different rules, to each of its it's own was the main original idea.....i used to think it was a conspiracy theory.....
💯
Plato is sht😀
I am so grateful for this full book review, it has been helping me a whole lot to navigate the Art world and not get damaged by it, in fact, makes me stronger and clearer to speak out to focus on rescuing human vitality and get rid of Art altogether. This channel has been an huge help in understanding the differences, to embrace the classical values, without hiding, nor resignating but to actually boldly embrace what i am doing,
We need an alternative… thank you for this series of videos.