Month: November 2009

“We live in a state of Blessed ignorance, but it is also a state of marvelous enlightenment”
(Hofstadter, I am a Strange Loop, p.362)
That establishes Euclidean geometry as tactile not visual. http://learn.uci.edu/media/OC01/11002/AR0111002_L1T2P1.gif
visual field intersects on our retina. http://img.webmd.com/dtmcms/live/webmd/consumer_assets/site_images/articles/health_and_medical_reference/eye_health/understanding-vision_problems-basics-myopia-and-hyperopia.jpg
our view.
http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/23/70823-004-2AD75C17.jpg
our vision.
http://www.griseldaonline.it/foto/checcoli/3A-%20jan-van-eyck-madonna-del-cancelliere-rolin-1439-parigi-louvre.jpg
Imagine what one would paint if we based our understanding of our world reality on our sense of smell. We know of a few new studies in this field:

From Artificial Chemical Sensing:

Olfaction and the Electronic Nose, Stetter, J.R.; Pensrose, W.R., eds.
Electrochem. Soc.: Pennington, NJ, 2001, pp. 8-14.
A COLORIMETRIC NOSE: “SMELL-SEEING”

Kenneth S. Suslick and Neal A. Rakow
School of Chemical Sciences
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
600 S. Mathews Ave., Urbana, IL 61801, USA
THE SMELL-SEEING ARRAY

When an array of metalloporphyrins deposited on an inert support (e.g.,
reverse phase silica gel) is exposed to various analytes, color changes in the
various porphyrin complexes are observed, and the color changes are often
dramatic. By simply subtracting the digital images of the array before and after
exposure, one may obtain a quantitative color change pattern: we refer to this as
“smell-seeing”. As shown in Figure 2, these color change patterns give striking
visual identification of a range of ligating vapors (including alcohols, amines,
ethers, phosphines, phosphites, thioethers, and thiols). Weakly-ligating vapors
such as arenes, halocarbons, and ketones can also be differentiated. Diffuse
reflectance spectroscopy studies have shown that solid-state spectral shifts are
similar to those known for ligation in solution. The array has demonstrated
interpretable and reversible responses even to analyte mixtures of strong ligands,
such as pyridines and phosphites. Color change patterns for mixtures are distinct
from either of the neat vapors.
Figure 2. Color change profiles (shown in black and white) for a series of vapors; the
degree of analyte softness (roughly the polarizability) increases from left to right, top to
bottom. Analytes were delivered in nitrogen streams saturated with the vapor at 20°C.
Images obtained upon full equilibration using an HP Scanjet 3C flatbed scanner.
Difference maps were obtained by subtracting the RGB images (i.e., { |R(after exporsure
to analyte) – R(before)|, |G(after exporsure to analyte) – G(before)|, |B(after exporsure to
analyte) – B(before)| }

direction,light source, http://www.pspug.org/tutorial/html/tutmini/pspug-perspective_v7.htm
or the indication of a collective perspective on a given fact.
http://www.thehindu.com/lr/2009/01/04/stories/2009010450260600.htm

An areal view of the earth does not revile the subdivision of the buildings, just their roof,
http://www.mccullagh.org/db9/1ds-3/san-francisco-aerial-view.jpg
an infrared photograph of a landscape will indicate the place of an object, not their color, http://images.pennnet.com/articles/mae/thm/th_0701maesupp_f1_02.jpg
An X-ray will define the inner bones, but will neglect the surface of our skin.
http://www.shop4dentist.com/images/x-ray-04.jpg
construct a reality. We learned that
http://spiralzoom.com/Science/spiralconsciousness/Strangeloop_op_221x600.jpg

“In the brain model proposed here, the casual potency of an idea, or an ideal, becomes just as real as that of a molecule, a cell, or a nerve impulse. Ideas cause ideas and help evolve new ideas. They interact with each other and with other mental forces in the same brain, in neighboring brains, and thanks to global communication, in far distant, foreign brains…an advance in evolution…” (p.205, 2007 Hofstadter, D. I am a Strange Loop)
http://brainwaves.corante.com/articles-synesthesia-brain.jpg

Guggenheim – Synesthesia:
http://bnee.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/09/synesthesia.jpg

“Some people – a surprisingly large number- “see” color or “taste” or “smell” or “feel” various sensations as they listen to music…” (P. xiii 2008, Musicophilia by Oliver Sacks)

When viewing a work of art, or listening to one, can we see truth? Can we feel it?

Truth is defined as “the property (as of a statement) of being in accord with fact or reality” (Merriam Webster Dictionary). Under this definition, truth is something that is universal, there is only one Truth. However, when placed into the context of different human individuals, different people can have conflicting perceptions of realities, and thus, a different personal truth. For example, a person with partial colorblindness might perceive a sweater to be dark grey, when in fact, to people without the disorder, it is red. Within that person’s reality the sweater is grey and “red” doesn’t have a definition. Art is something that is subjective and a person’s reaction to it depends on various factors, with large part in personal tastes. The reaction one person gets from viewing or listening to art is intrapersonal. A person can gain a personal truth from art, but as each person’s perception is individual, a person cannot see a universal Truth.

1. We can all agree that art is abstract. With this in mind, we are forced to recognize that what we see won’t be the same art that everyone else sees. We all have different experiences and will come to different conclusions. However, there is no way to “see” the truth of art. Truth is a concrete, indisputable fact set in reality. You cannot argue that 2 + 2 = 4. It’s impossible. But art is open to interpretation. It’s liberated from the confines of the labels of “true” and “false” because it can be whatever the viewer wants it to be, even if the artist spells out “the truth” within it. Art is free. Because of this, it is possible for art to conjure an emotion from the viewer. While we will never get the truth of the art unless we ask the artist, we may be able to pick up on how s/he was feeling at the time while viewing said art (hearing a sharp strike to a piano, seeing the fluid lines of a painting, watching the quick movement of a dancer). The viewer may also feel something that the artist might not have intended for them to feel at all. But feeling doesn’t depend on anyone but the feeler.The feelings that arise while we view art help add to it’s mystery and can make it an experience.

When seeing or listening to a work of art we can see the truth. Sometimes it may be harder than others. You must focus and pay attention to what the artist is expressing. However, the artists truth maybe be different than your truth and your truth may be different than another’s truth. Feeling the truth however may be a bit more natural. It maybe be closer to the truth that the artist feels. This is because feeling something is much more emotional than seeing it. By feeling the truth, we feel it in our emotions, we may cry, smile, laugh or even become angry. This may be how the artist was feeling before or even during his or her creation

When viewing a work of art, or listening to one, can we see the truth?  Can we feel it?

There is no concrete definition of truth. An absolute truth does not exist. The only truth that does exist, is the truth told from somebody’s perspective, which makes it biased and not necessarily completely truthful. So when viewing, or listening to a work of art, the only truth we can see/ feel is the truth that the artist wants us to know. The truth we feel/ see is only the truth to the artist and to the audience, who are viewing/ listening to a work of art through the artist’s perspective. So yes, we can see A truth, but it is not THE truth. A truth is only true to a certain group of people, THE truth is universal and does not exist.