My view on arts, music and aesthetics in general

  • Thread starter Thread starter SELFMADE
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    General Music
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between art, music, aesthetics, and their perceived effects on individuals, particularly in comparison to drugs. Participants explore the implications of pleasure derived from these mediums, questioning whether they should be encouraged or banned, and discussing the broader societal impacts of pleasurable experiences.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that art and aesthetics function similarly to drugs in the brain, suggesting a need for regulation or even a ban on pleasurable experiences.
  • Others challenge this view, questioning the rationale behind banning harmless pleasures and highlighting the positive aspects of art and creativity.
  • A few participants express skepticism about the claim that art induces drug-like reactions, requesting scientific references to support such assertions.
  • There are discussions about the potential productivity gains if all pleasurable activities were banned, but this raises questions about the value of enjoyment in life.
  • Some participants note historical contexts where significant advancements were made by individuals who might be labeled as "druggies" or "psychos," suggesting a complex relationship between creativity and substance use.
  • Concerns are raised about the implications of self-medication and its association with self-destruction, alongside a call for clarity on the definitions and assumptions underlying these discussions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no clear consensus on the relationship between art, pleasure, and drug-like effects. Disagreements persist regarding the morality of pleasure derived from art and the implications of banning such experiences.

Contextual Notes

Some arguments rely on assumptions about the effects of art and drugs without empirical evidence, and the discussion includes varying definitions of pleasure and productivity that remain unresolved.

SELFMADE
Messages
80
Reaction score
0
These are no more than drugs. They work as drugs in people' brains. So why should they be encouraged or even consumed in the first place? In my view, we need to ban them. Or we should legalize all drugs.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
So why the crusade against harmless pleasures?
 
If drugs didn't negatively affect people's health and lifestyle, then I don't think anyone would have any problem with them. Art doesn't negatively affect people's health and lifestyle.

I could go on, but I think that is sufficient.
 
Lets's ban all pleasurable things, including sex. That should weed out the prudes within a generation or two, assuming they will honor the ban.
 
CRAZYreworked700pix.jpg


"CRAZY" by Mr. Z Shoe. Pencil on Bristol Board, 14 x17, 2008
 
Maybe you could just poke your eyes out, then we wouldn't have to worry about where to "draw the line" on aesthetics.

Fantastic piece Zooby! The irony makes it all the better.
 
SELFMADE said:
They work as drugs in people' brains.
Could you provide some peer reviewed references?








:biggrin::rolleyes:
 
bp_psy said:
Could you provide some peer reviewed references?

Yeah, I'm really not sure that art and other aesthetic mediums actually cause a drug like reaction in the brain. If the OP could produce a scientific article discussing this idea that may be helpful.
 
TheStatutoryApe said:
Yeah, I'm really not sure that art and other aesthetic mediums actually cause a drug like reaction in the brain. If the OP could produce a scientific article discussing this idea that may be helpful.

Yeah, I wouldn't listen to him. He got a 50% on his first Calc II exam and then didn't read the syllabus and note that it could have been made up.
 
  • #10
I firmly believe that art is the only reason to live.
 
  • #11
zoobyshoe said:
CRAZYreworked700pix.jpg


"CRAZY" by Mr. Z Shoe. Pencil on Bristol Board, 14 x17, 2008
Good heavens are you talented.

As for the OP, I get your point about pleasurable feelings or emotions elicited by art, music, and etc. (again, the 'and etc.' part being the truly important one) are neurotransmitters firing at chemical synapses therefore chemical reactions. Basically. What I don't get is the leap to escalation.
 
  • #12
SELFMADE said:
These are no more than drugs. They work as drugs in people' brains. So why should they be encouraged or even consumed in the first place? In my view, we need to ban them. Or we should legalize all drugs.

It seems that you have never found genuine pleasure in art, foremost from being deluded that substance abuse gives pleasure.

Wearing decorated jeans may make one feel cool, but a crack pipe in their pocket indicates little sensibility.
 
  • #13
I can see his point that it's like a drug though. Not specifically art, but just pleasurable things in general.
For instance, school just ended for us, so I'm probably going to waste the next 2-3 hours playing video games or watching TV instead of doing something useful like studying physics.

I've actually had similar thoughts as the OP, however not nearly as drastic as to "ban" them, but I can never ponder it too long because the thought scares me.

True we could ban all pleasurable things, and we probably would be more productive as a species and our scientific and technological advancements would skyrocket (I would think).

But, then you must ask, if we don't enjoy it then what is the point?
Sure we could all make marvelous contributions to mankind... but by then we would be dead and our own work would be of no use to us would it? But, by that same logic, all the time we spent pleasuring ourselves with art and such, would also be of no use... So I guess it just comes down to do whatever you want with your time here on Earth.

xD
 
  • #14
S_Happens said:
Fantastic piece Zooby! The irony makes it all the better.
GeorginaS said:
Good heavens are you talented.

Zooby's Designer Drugs Inc. thanks you both!
 
  • #15
SELFMADE said:
These are no more than drugs. They work as drugs in people' brains. So why should they be encouraged or even consumed in the first place? In my view, we need to ban them. Or we should legalize all drugs.
My thoughts on your thoughts: What makes you think anyone cares and what makes you think your opinions are worth publishing?
 
  • #16
I sense flames building.
 
  • #17
FredGarvin said:
My thoughts on your thoughts: What makes you think anyone cares and what makes you think your opinions are worth publishing?

I could not have said it better myself.
 
  • #18
Oddbio said:
True we could ban all pleasurable things, and we probably would be more productive as a species and our scientific and technological advancements would skyrocket (I would think).

How can you say that when basically all of what historical society considers the most advanced civilizations that have ever lived (i.e. - the egyptians, mayans, greeks, etc..) were heavy drug users, with most of it being marijuana and cocaine.

Most of the greatest advancements mankind has made in just about every field has been made by "druggies" and "psychos" to use the terms liberally (which really makes me wonder sometimes lol).
 
  • #19
bp_psy said:
Could you provide some peer reviewed references?


Agreed 100%. Provide some evidence for your claims, instead of making (seemingly) wild assumptions.
 
  • #20
Kronos5253 said:
Most of the greatest advancements mankind has made in just about every field has been made by "druggies" and "psychos" to use the terms liberally (which really makes me wonder sometimes lol).

The difference being that "psychos" treated not to hallucinate, etc. are proving themselves much more productive. Physical and mental self-destruction came and comes from self-medicating.
 
  • #21
Loren Booda said:
The difference being that "psychos" treated not to hallucinate, etc. are proving themselves much more productive. Physical and mental self-destruction came and comes from self-medicating.

To the latter part, of course of course, that's psychology 101. But that's also kind of a circular statement, because most self-medicating is a form of self-destruction anyway.

But I don't know that I understand what you mean by the first part... Can you elaborate more, or explain it in a different way?
 
  • #22
I could be wrong, but I think the OP's point was more so that banning drugs on the basis that enducing pleasure through neurochemical alteration of the brain is somehow intrinsically immoral is an inconsistent position, illusrated by his hyperbolic example.
 
  • #23
It sounded to me like the rant of someone who was just busted.
 
  • #24
Kronos5253 said:
Most of the greatest advancements mankind has made in just about every field has been made by "druggies" and "psychos" to use the terms liberally (which really makes me wonder sometimes lol).

If by "liberally" you mean completely inaccurately, then yes.
 
  • #25
zoobyshoe said:
If by "liberally" you mean completely inaccurately, then yes.

I don't know about the druggies part, but most of the revolutionary advances were probably considered "crazy" before they were successfully completed.

In terms of the arts, there is a fairly high correlation between creativity and mental abnormailty.
 
  • #26
Chi Meson said:
It sounded to me like the rant of someone who was just busted.

Hahahahahah! Yeah, a clumsy variation on the old "Alcohol's way worse for people than pot, and it's legal."
 
  • #27
Galteeth said:
I don't know about the druggies part, but most of the revolutionary advances were probably considered "crazy" before they were successfully completed.

This is a meme you run into a lot, but if you read the history it turns out very few great innovators were considered "crazy", much less "psycho" in their time. Most of the opposition they encountered could be boiled down to the mere belief they were absolutely wrong.
 
  • #28
Kronos5253 said:
To the latter part, of course of course, that's psychology 101. But that's also kind of a circular statement, because most self-medicating is a form of self-destruction anyway.

But I don't know that I understand what you mean by the first part... Can you elaborate more, or explain it in a different way?

It's ironic that for ages 13-24 I was self-medicating anxiety, depression and later psychosis with some alcohol, pot and more serious drugs. Once I accepted a medical regimen and quit the drugs, however, I ceased social withdrawal, acting out and hallucinations, and found an appropriate pharmacology to fight the very habits I had formerly indulged.

As you can see, I am a believer in the healing powers of medicine. The brain has great ability to explore safely mental phenomena without drug abuse. I used to take substances to risk what I must now ingest pills against - self-destruction.
 
Last edited:
  • #29
Let me put it this way, what if you made addicts out of a group of bright young people and told them to make discoveries, accomplish great things for mankind or else they can't get their doses of heroin?

Harmful? I don't see any, they are working for the benefit of all.
 
  • #30
So in your opinion, Beethoven, Bach, etc...were dealers?
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
13K
  • · Replies 119 ·
4
Replies
119
Views
12K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K