From: Amara Graps (amara@amara.com)
Date: Sat Sep 01 2001 - 18:17:18 MDT
From: Anders Sandberg:
>The renaissance involved trying to create something new that unified
>the old knowledge with the new scientific/economic/artistic
>discoveries, and then change society accordingly
'Trying' might not be the best word... :-)
The areas of arts, literature, music, philosophy, politics,
economics, science, each underwent major developments from
1300-1700, which occurred at staggered (not coinciding) times. I
don't know if the experts are still debating what caused the
Renaissance, but my art history texts state that that the
Renaissance was the first period in history to be aware of its own
existence to coin a label for itself. Moreover, it divided the past
on the basis of *human achievements*. "Individualism", first set in
the Greek times, emerged anew, only the Renaissance people didn't
want to just recreate again, what the Greeks accomplished. Instead,
the Renaissance people wanted to build on those ancient ideas and
then take those ideas further into new directions.
It's fun to look at a Time-Line of some of the events occuring
during those early Renaissance years. On the heels of the Black
Death (1340s):
Literature: Petrarch (1300s): the first "humanist"
Technology: The Guttenberg printing press developed (1445) and
demand began for different kinds of books
Political: Constantinople fell to the Turks (1453), Columbus
discovers America (1492), Hundred Years' War ends (1453)
>I see many similarities with today:
Yes
>we need a new renaissance to unify the old knowledge with the new
>discoveries and then find ways of changing our societies accordingly.
Yes
>The fact that there are people trying to bridge the two cultures and
>create a new synthesis isn't enough, as long as they stand fairly
>alone and unsupported. What made the daring transdisciplinary work
>of the renaissance so important was that it took place in a cultural
>context where it gained support and influence - the actual number of
>humanists, scientists, artists and engineers were fairly low, but
>they affected society profoundly through various channels.
Yes, The conditions in Italian civilization seemed to be primed for
the first Renaissance seeds to germinate and flower. The revival of
the ancient Greek and Roman works by the humanists would not have
gone very far if it wasn't united with the culture and genius of the
Italian people. Then from Italy, the Renaissance spread to the rest
of Europe like a breath of fresh air. Wonderful!
>We need to find the
>modern counterparts of these channels of reaching into society and
>for creating a cultural context that promotes synthesis.
Then let's start, (as the Italians did), with the Greeks, shall we?
With the Greeks, we find that science, research, and the acquisition
of knowledge remain apart from religious and political authority.
With the Greeks, we find that military power operates under, and is
checked by, civilian control. We find a constitutional and
consentual government. We find that private property and free
economic activity are immune from government. With the Greeks, we
find the notion of dissent and open criticism of government,
religion and military. With the Greeks, we find a strong harmony
between man's word and deed based on the man's ethos and pact with
himself, which ultimately, determines his own destiny. With the
Greeks, we find a trust in the "polis", to provide the check against
a human's huge ability for harm and destruction.
It's a good place to start, isn't? Presently I'm aware of several
places in the world where scholars are working hard to educate the
public about the value of Greek ideas, and also to influence
politicians to adopt many of these ideas. We can educate ourselves
and others, as well.
Once basic principles have been adopted (which is up to the
individual), then we can look at other aspects of our cultures to
build the connections to forge a synthesis. I'll go on to Natasha's
comments about this.
Natasha says:
>The numerous electronic art conferences approach this synthesis
>Anders. In fact, for the past decade, these conferences have been
>inviting scientists to give key talks.
About forging links between science and art, which would play a role
in the next 'Renaissance',
Here I think that it's important to notice, recognize, accept, and
support scientists who are "synthesists". You won't often find these
people in mainstream science circles. You might find them through
their published books, but I don't think that you will find many in
the normal universities and research laboratories. The reason for
this is that, even though I know that many scientists have a strong
aesthetic sense (I've noticed especially a strong correlation with
scientists being musicians), the scientific activities and funding
structure do not encourage scientists to be generalists. The
scientific-art synthesists are actually the generalists, who cross
often scientific boundaries and who see a larger picture and carry a
"vision". They are the Feynmans, Dysons, Deutsches, Drexlers,
Minskeys, Mandelbrots, Barrows, Goulds, Asimovs, Dewdneys,
Pickovers, Knuths, Kernighans, Dawkins, for example. If we continue
to pay attention to these kinds of people, discussing their
activities, and encouraging those activities, each in our own way, I
think that is a good step in the right direction. I'm not saying
that all of these people are artists, but they are the kind of
people who sythesize well, leading to flowers which can bloom, to
bring about the next 'Renaissance'.
Next, as Anders said:
>Sure, I am merely reiterating the same concept. But I think it needs
>to be restated again and again among ourselves, so that more of us
>actually go out and create this Enlightenment. While there are many
>stellar examples of both renaissance persons and people actively
>promoting the new enlightenment among us, there should be far more
>people doing it!
We can do it ourselves! The Greeks were do-ers, and so are we, yes?
How about this, Anders: Now that the 'Globalization' has set about
some currency simplification to bring about the Euro, let's ask the
people of the world to agree next on some standards for office
supplies and electrical power. Think how it would simplify our
lives! We wouldn't have to waste extra time and attention for
different countries: formatting documents differently, punching
holes differently, using different sized envelopes, paper, holders,
folders, staplers, file cabinets, making different-sized business
cards, having the right electrical adapter and power converter. We
could spend that valuable time on creating a high-quality object of
interest, instead.
(she says, grumpily, after recognizing this weekend that she must
reconstruct a nontrivial part of her US photo darkroom to work in
Germany)
By the way, I really like examples of artists who have some
knowledge of science, or scientists who have some experience with
art, creating and presenting a piece of scientific artwork. Even if
the viewer of the piece does not recognize or understand the
scientific aspects, the artwork still plants a seed in the viewer's
mind. That is, an image that goes into the viewer's subconscious,
and then gurgles happily away. I've been thinking alot of the
"Longest Art Gallery" of the Stockholm subway system that you
(Anders) showed me a few weeks ago, in particular the piece near the
KTH exit: a geometrical idealized representation of the event
horizon of a black hole. Is a description of that artpiece written
up anywhere? Does the average subway-goer who exits from that stop
know what that artpiece represents? I would gues that after a person
passes under those geometrical objects a hundred times or so, he/she
would eventually become curious and want to learn more.
More about planting seeds, as Natasha says:
>The best way to "infiltrate" the environments which you are
>referring to is to be there. It is not a game plan, it is a
>presence. Ideas permeate best at the comfort zone level where people
>do not feel pressured. Going into an environment and pushing an
>agenda is usually met with a counter force. Going in an introducing
>an agenda through persuasive credibility and a collaborative spirit
>is usually met with a welcome.
Absolutely. Also, approaching people from the side of the arts, in
order to discuss strong philosophical ideas is often more
comfortable for everyone, as well. Even if learning about their
worldview is not your original intention. For example, engaging new
people in discussions about music, films, books, can naturally lead
to nice discoveries of their personal political and philosophical
views. Once they are talking and sharing their views, then you can
too.
Now let's assume that we are carrying some deep principles in our
hearts and minds, and that we are "doing" the things that we love in
our daily lives, and along the way, planting seeds about our
passions. As stated earlier, the Renaissance would not have occured
if the individual efforts took place in isolation, therefore let's
pay attention to the connections. One very big thing that we have
today that our ancestors did not have is the Internet. Sitting on
top of the Internet are layers on top of layers of some fascinating
experiments regarding people links and connections. I'm stating the
obvious, I know, but I'll say it anyway, use these connections! The
next Renaissance needs our Internet connections.
To end this note, let me present an idea. Create a list of
"Renaissance Books." In this list are particular books that made an
impact on you (or on people close to you) which synthesize
ideas or else could be a solid connection node for synthesizing other
ideas. In some of these books, valuable ideas could be hidden in
fictional stories or poetry. The goal of thinking of such a thing,
simply, is to recognize those efforts by "synthesists", and to help
forge connections (different areas, or to help between old and new ideas).
I made my own list yesterday and had fun with it. I'll give my own
"Renaissance Library", if anyone is interested.
Amara
(P.S. unsubscribed till ~Jan. CC me if you want to be sure I see your
message)
********************************************************************
Amara Graps, PhD email: amara@amara.com
Computational Physics vita: finger agraps@shell5.ba.best.com
Multiplex Answers URL: http://www.amara.com/
********************************************************************
"Whenever I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the
future of the human race." -- H. G. Wells
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:10:19 MST