Thursday 15th March § Leave a comment
“Im a philosophical hobbyist, do this just for kicks and giggles but seriously nice work on the anti kitsch, I love when people identify things its good beans … To go calmly into the dark is to forget the power of the candle said confused gus
what is school teaching about true good endure these days? yeah thats my question smarty pants 🙂 really im curious though, is sophism more identifiable than rightousness in self reflection? for that matter am I only trying to shine a light on something I have no idea or concept of or do we all already understand the universe but forget certain parts? TRUTH GOODNESS and ENDURANCE thats how the artistry survives, keep it up and soon I will invent a medal for people like you who nail coffins of predispositional mummys, the tomb of proof is beauty in art, the questions all outweigh the real truths, over englishification of something so very very simple equals people going crazy to figure things out when they only need to step down their two feet at once thats all they need now draw it and email me it and I will have a resounding feeling of hope that I am accurate and goodness will prevail ! truth comes cheap always in exchange for favor for favor, they say social credit is the last thing keeping us away from them too dont forget to put that into your picture there”
This is a comment left by a person called Cory at 5:30 on the 12th of March. Originally posted on the About Me page.
I’m not sure what to make of it. It’s complimentary, I think. (In all honesty, I can’t make sense of quite a lot of it). I hadn’t considered the possibility that people might actually read this stuff, or that they might read it in semi-seriousness. So I want to add this disclaimer: Please, don’t believe anything you read here. It’s just random musings on what I’m thinking at one point in time, mainly composed in a sleep deprived, hyperactive, or UHU fume stupor and has the type of intellectual rigour that would make a tabeloid journalist proud.
In response to Cory’s question about truth goodness and endurance (if I understand it correctly): We’ve yet to be taught any theory beyond the very basics at the Uni: colour theory, primary objects and systems of proportion. Metaphysics within architecture is so far beyond the horizon that we could quite possibly never have to think about it. At the moment the drive is to prod us towards creating Architecture (pronounced with a capital A).
Personally, I’m cynical about the idea of ‘true’ architecture (or an art), because that suggests that there should be one unified style of architecture, devoid of originality. Not that originality in itself is worth a hat.