On the semantics of "Abstract Reasoning"; an opinion.
Personally I don't see any connection at all between the meaning of the word
abstract as it applies to art, and
abstract as it applies to "abstract reasoning".
The word
abstract has a wide range of meanings.
I believe that the following list give some feel for the various meanings of the word
abstract, at least as I think of it.
I will give only three main areas of semantics for the word
abstract. I am aware that there are other areas as well.
1. Intangible, non physical, a thought, an idea, a mood, an ideal (like truth, justice, etc.) - existing only in the mind.
While this meaning of the word obviously applies to any type of thinking, it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with
reason. In other words, irrational thoughts are just as abstract as rational ones. So when we think about "abstract reasoning" we need to recognize that the word
reasoning is a part of that description.
In the case of paintings. The paintings themselves are quite concrete (i.e. they exist in physical form). They are typically referred to as
abstract because in many cases they convey a mood or idea (i.e. they convey something intangible or
abstract in this sense of the word).
A second meaning of the word abstract is the following:
2. Summary, synoptic, sketchy, incomplete, impressionistic - to convey only the gist of an idea, mood, or feeling.
This is probably the main use of the word when used to describe
abstract art.
When an
"abstract" or summary is given concerning any
abstract reasoning it is expected that there is a more formal detailed logical explanation beyond the abstract (or summary).
Formal
abstract reasoning is usually very complete and detailed and is therefore not
abstract at all in this semantic sense of the word.
Although I should mention that I've seen far too many people hide behind this meaning of the word
abstract in an attempt to argue the validity of an extremely vague and incomplete idea. They argue that it is valid
"abstract reasoning" simply because it's intangible. The truth of the matter is that their ideas are not
reasonable which is the other half of that description!
I would also argue that the word "abstract" is not used to imply that an idea is incomplete or vague when it is used together in there phrase
"abstract reasoning". I see the word
"abstract" as having the following meaning in that context:
3. Applicable to more than one situation. Conceivable without the need for a specific example.
I see this as the main semantics being implied when using the word
"abstract" when it accompanies the word
"reasoning".
As an example, the formalism of mathematics is
"abstract reasoning" in this way. Mathematics is not vague, incomplete, or sketchy. On the contrary it is extremely logically rigorous. Therefore it is not abstract at all by the meaning of the word
"abstract" as it applies to art.
marley.wannabee said:
When i look at a variety of paintings and really 'understand' what the word abstract means...
then knowing what 'abstract reasoning' is becomes more clear.
Based on the semantics information that I have shared above, I would personally conclude that the word
"abstract" as it applies to art has absolutely nothing at all to do with the meaning of the word
"abstract" as it applies to
"abstract reasoning".
So when you say that looking at abstract paintings clarifies the meaning of
"abstract reasoning" for you I would argue that you have actually misunderstood the entire concept.
Please keep in mind that this post is solely an opinion and feedback to your thread on this topic. This post is not intended as a personal judgment. Comments and opposing opinions are more than welcome. Discussion is always beneficial.