5. The Meaning of Lost or Forgotten Language From Discussions Dr. Pandozy Founder of Art About Art Foundation “Art Reflecting on Itself”
Dr. Pandozy’s project “Lost Language,” consisted twenty sculptures with Telos as the centerpiece. Lost language equates to lost values. When you forget language, you lose meaning and the fruits of civilization, values that language contains. What does this mean for anthropology? It means retarding human development. People no longer value the logic of the great philosophers and thinkers. Dr. Pandozy’s Telos project is to make people reflect on what has been lost. When people are wise, ethical, and logical, it benefits humanity. Artists work for humanity. When language is no longer in the dictionary or in the minds of people, the language is lost. An artist’s job is to bring back what is lost and revive it. Every artist should become an anthropologist. To be an anthropologist, one needs to look at the final end of humanity.
Today, if we look at the condition of the humanity, the world is regressing in terms of values, ethics, and logic. Artists studying, researching, and working with an anthropological mindset must look at the ultimate end, in order for humanity to progress and move forward. To that end artists, must look at the purpose of art, their work.
Telos, a lost word, means purpose, Aristotelian point that everything in the universe has a purpose. Even a blade of grass has a purpose in ecological completion. All energy interacts to make the environment work. To disturb the environment mean to go against natural purpose, the process of civilization, and anthropology. Telos necessitates ultimate purpose, judging from the process of civilization. Somehow there is an ultimate end out there that is open to imagination. The ideal is wholeness of humanity, where people are authentic and present in the world each moment with a constructive approach each of us following the ultimate natural purpose, which is the completion of the individual.
This comes to you from the Assistant Director of the Art About Art Foundation, Amanda Conner.
The New Humanism in art must be understood as a university of thought in evolutionary way. Resting on unified universal knowledge and on the ethic and aesthetic qualities of being characterized by Martin Heidegger’s models of Dasein, the New Humanism represents an added value that contributes to the quality of art ideas for we know as a physiological reality that the eye sees only what the mind tells it to. The word new stands as a temporal existential requirement and a synthesis of the universal knowledge the artist must possess in order to exist and operate in the world. The artist’s existence in accordance with Heidegger’s Dasein stands as a active presence in the world with the consciousness of the past, present and future as a capacity and potentiality of being in the world. Thus, more knowledge and a more expanded consciousness are necessary for the artist of the future to change the world in order to fulfill Heidegger’s vision. In first place the New Humanism clearly establishes a direct continuity with the humanistic tradition of the Renaissance and the Enlightenment together; in second place, with the help of thought, the artist will be able to produce a synthesis of human values and envision a brand new world projected toward the future.
From a physiological standpoint, the artist, in order to make a good art, must incorporate in the work of art new ideas, which come from thinking and reflecting on the reality of the world, not indulging in dream-like behavior. Most importantly, he or she must understand the way the human brain arrives at the perception of things and necessarily of the world. Chapter 1 of “Of Art and Arteology” elucidates the phenomenological movement of sensory perception enriched by constant input of cognitive knowledge. The phenomenological of art, as a new method developed by the author, advances the chain of production that brings about greater perception of reality and new visions of potential transformation of the world. Perception without the cognitive input will always remain incomplete and impaired by the lack of substantial knowledge.
A new input of cognitive knowledge is what the New Humanism is all about. The input must be “heuristic,” pedagogical and purposive to have any value at all and stimulate intellectual functions as well as directly producing qualitative effects upon the human mind and upon reality itself. In addition, such traits contribute to constitute not a duality of being but a unity of the consciousness of life and art. This fact becomes evident when we visit a contemporary museum and we remain indifferent before a work of art, which does not move us because it has no embodiment of thought. The question that comes to mind then is simple: what are the required qualities that make a work of art worth looking at? Art without content is produced under an empty mind. Most probably the artist had a blank mind and a blank canvas to start with. We all know that the world needs reformation of the concept of art and that is why the author is proposing a reawakening of thought bringing human values to the forefront for better art works and a better world.
There are more than five thousands quotes being published by famous people just on the questions, “What is art?” but there is only one answer that encompasses them all: “art, being a human concept and not a metaphysical one, must incorporate our best thoughts in time and space.” Just to name a few: Leo Tolstoy said that art is “education;” Harold Rosenberg said the same thing without specificity; Dewey said that “art is experience” of the highest kind without referential correlations; Merleau-Ponty said is everything without differentiating dreams from the perception of reality; Picasso said that it is the industry of the lie because most likely he was an idealist before becoming a materialist, which is contrary to much of the answers produced by great men; etc. This book brings the Humanistic qualities to a higher level and purpose to revolutionizes the concept of art by logical necessity. “It turns it into a process of discovering the best values of life and the best in us.” (author’s quotation). However, down from the meta-critical to the critical level of analysis, few authors have dared assign similar role to art that reflects the spirit of anthropological evolution simply because artists will no longer be seen as sociopaths and iconoclastic.
Most of the 5,000 quotes being reviewed by the author do not support his argument, but at the same time, they show the enormous disparaging views, which denote a defective causal developmental condition present in our dysfunctional societies. The author is about to discuss here in a different way of life for artists, who still live in a world of dreams that will never materialize. They are all wishful thinkers, which leaves the world at the mercy of uncontrollable and irrational forces. Most artists still believe in art as “inspiration” from above. However, none of these artists think or write in addition to painting and sculpting their confused abstraction of reality. Writing invites to reflection and self-awareness. It is another type of exercise which helps direct our imagination. There is no productive imagination without thought. Satisfaction of being artist derives also from the fact that one acquire confidence in what one does, but how can this happen without thought and reflection? To fully understand the New Humanism one must have an open vision of human evolution as well as philosophical and scientific awareness built on the idea of self-education to produce concrete significance in a work of art.
Heidegger in “What is thought?” Speaks of ontology of mind in order to signify the temporal advancements of human thought . This author says the same thing to signify the substance that builds better art and better individuals. So, in reality one does not know what kind of education these controversial artists are all about. To an artist the New Humanism is pre-conceptual and educational because it conditions his or her mind to form a constructive intention to be actualized in the work of art and to grow consciously, ontologically, epistemologically and existentially, opening a better anthropological perspective for him-herself and humanity as a whole.
There is a level of consciousness in every artist, which can be measured by the degree of humanity in his or her work. Like during the middle ages, the work of art began with an initial idea, which must first be thought out, sketched and executed. Then it had to be related to the notion of humanity and evaluated by the artist who is the best critic of his or her work. In fact, the good artist is involved in constant self-critical work during the execution of a work of art. Self-criticism must be objective by all means in order to be constructive. In order to avoid the dire consequences arising from the public later, it must be logical so to invite logical critical response. The work may be controversial, but cannot lack substance, which demands reverence and respect.
At the time of the Renaissance artists were seekers of knowledge in every field of science, philosophy, agriculture, architecture. They were even war engineering and inventors and designer of new weapons and fortifications, like Leonardo Da Vinci. Representation was secondary even though execution of certain works required special rendering and special skills. Sensibility, honor and status of the artist were well recognized and granted to the good minds, Artists were respected in society and welcome wherever they went at the time. Nowadays, the situation is quite different. The artist was generally regarded as real gentleman, but hardly a genius because much glory belonged only to the saints. Yet, the Renaissance was not entirely about perfection of the making and rendering of imagery and techniques, but about what the artist was able to communicate. At the time, one could not get away with empty images and abstractions, which means that he or she must have had a well articulate and mature mind. An artist’s mind had to be supreme nevertheless, capable of reaching the spirit of humanity in great depths, or at least be able to express the true human spirit. Michelangelo was an architect, a poet and a scientist in human physiology. That is why he was also a diligent and meticulous reporter of historic events, which made his art work commemorative and vibrant, admired universally century after century. Painting at the time had special challenges and modes of communication beyond photography and other media. The contemporary artist today may be open to other special roles requiring greater knowledge and understanding of the different and more complex realities in the world in which we live. However, the commitment to society should be the same, which allows to the artist to participate in human evolution at a higher level, to send universal messages of philosophical, ethical and scientific righteousness of reality to a desperately needing audience and improve the course of humanity.
The author is speaking about the role of communicating in the future and the formulation of a type of language of conceptual reality arising from true perceptual live experiences, about new conceptual visions of the kind of ideality that keeps the mind moving ahead. This in comparison, may truly be the new important function of art of tomorrow – be at the forefront of humanistic development with purpose and vision.
All societies need some criticism because they are established by humans especially when they lack ethical and aesthetic wisdom. In art history and art criticism what abound is much subjectivism and poor wisdom. In other words, art can still send a message of truth straight to the heart of the observer and demonstrate that one can live in a better world if he or she captures the meaning and values of potential reality and engages the public in serious and challenging ways to change history, improve the environment, customs and beliefs. In sum to make works of art of universal significance the artist must embody universal thought; unite rather than separate cultures, which require knowledge and commitment. The artist must therefore be knowledgeable and extroverted to facilitate communication. Art would then become an instrument of social change and the result of special reflection on the problems of the world, but must be supported by research, perceptual advancement and maturity of thought, which is a great deal more challenging for the future artist than playing with images.
Raffaele Martini Pandozy,
(sculptor and Ph.D. in art education)
Revised July, 2017
3. Toward a Constructive Natural History — On the Principles of Evolution and on First Principles of Life and Art
The principles of evolution cannot be fully described by some empirical disciplines such as archeology or paleontology, which narrate the history of humankind through artifacts, but do not determine their cultural and physical necessity and interaction in time. The study of evolution, after notable scientific developments in the field of neurology and biology, must instead be undertaken from the advanced principle of common causation resting on cognitive and genetic enrichment of human intelligence, which brings true core evolution and moves it toward the new paradigmatic ides of scientific methodology. Aristotle was the precursor of the study of the principles of “first causes” that move human nature forward. The movement of human evolution, from the first mover is now bound to continue to infinite horizons in time and consequently, must continue to rest on “first principles” of causation. Descartes’ Discourse on Method produced a generalization of the notion of evolution by establishing primary and secondary causes of development, but in reality, the Aristotelian method is what offers the broadest interpretation from the origin of the soul to infinite unknown, developments of human evolution
The author will start this excursus from the philosophical standpoint of “first principles” to arrive at a new notion of the inseparable connection of art and life in support of the principle of universalization of knowledge, which we all must advocate for the advancement of human intelligence and anthropology.
A first principle is a basic, foundational, self-evident
proposition or assumption that cannot be deduced
from any other proposition or assumption.
In philosophy, first principles are taught by Aristotelians
and a nuanced version of first principles are referred to
as postulates by Kantians. (Wikipedia Internet)
If artists had paid attention to what signifies thought development and put into practice some of the major realizations coming from ancient Greece, beginning from Pythagoras, (570 BC), the precursor of mathematics, today we would be living in a different world. Human thought continued to evolve with Parmenides,’ (500 BC), who arrived at the definition of being after studying natural phenomena. Then there came Socrates, who (399 BC) who began question the origins of life and the soul that characterizes the energy that move it. He also’ laid out the logical foundation of research. Plato (433 BC) began questioning the mind that produces thought by contributing to the foundations of research. Questioning is a form of dialogue, which is the foundation o political structures. Aristotle, Plato’ student, (284BC) produced a monumental work establishing the foundation of empirical philosophy, the logic of science, metaphysics, ethics and aesthetic, and more thus questioning the entire spectrum of nature. Then there was Plotinus, (270 BC), who determined the causal order of things.
If artists had learned, embodied and preserved all this body of knowledge, we would probably not be looking at “videogames,” but we would be living in a better world with ethical standard with more respect and observance of the natural laws. We would also be healthier and more secure. The world would live in peace and harmony without global warming and terrorism. Individuals would be healthier, happier and more intelligent for the laws of genetic evolution have always been the same since then.
Artists throughout history did very little to support the fundamental values that some philosopher have worked for their entire life. Whether we like it or not, like all things in life, the concept of art must mow rest on tangible existential reasons, which in philosophy are called first principles. We must remind ourselves that the existence of all things, including ideas and concepts must rest on the principles that establish their causation. Art, like all human concepts, is no exception. Aristotle in Book 1 singled out these principles, one by one. He laid out the empirical method of logical investigation and by that arrived at proving the existence and definition of “soul” as biological and spiritual source of life. In addition, he proved that mathematics always offer the logical method that proves scientific reality. With this thought he undertook the most fundamental ‘first principle’ that human life rested on the actuality and potentiality of being, (like the sum of the enclosed area of a triangle always amounting to 180 degrees). Life and art are bound like the internal equation of a triangle, non-dissociable and interdependent.
The soul is what allows all living things to exist and to multiply, which is another example of ‘first principles’ satisfying the causal notion of existence. He determined the definition of the soul by logical empirical means, but like Descartes his immense knowledge could not drive him to a higher state of mind, or he would have been considered godlike.
The comparison with the artistic quality produced throughout the history of art is here apparent, considering the lack of sharing the great knowledge available to artists, their consequential poor state of mind and their outlook at life. The soul is not made of material substance, but it is invigorated by its own accomplishments and realizations. Human feelings come directly from the soul, according to Aristotle, but true knowledge is what moves the soul. After all, we know that the soul is energy, energy that cannot be dispersed and that always returns to the source. Thus the soul is the source and the dispenser of energy, but it is also the light that brightens the minds like the sun that brightens the surrounding stars of our galaxy.
This pretty much describes the ideal idea of art. Aristotle proved the existence of the soul simply by the realization that it animates all living things as an element of biology (BookII) whose source is unknown, as a “first organized biological body beyond human understanding, but this is not the case when we speak of the living force of human life. Obviously, there is a point in which the causality of the physical body ends and metaphysics begins, which means that at this point physical causality ends and a mysterious forms of existence begin, which have been surmised by many esoteric minds. However, all the senses and all the human faculties that dwell on feelings are aware of the mystery that challenges human imagination. The constant postulations of thinkers and scientists though are not wasted energy. Nevertheless, whatever nourishes the body must have a scientific reason of existence, says Aristotle. The thought of art is not excluded from this rule, which means that one day artists and scientists together will discover a new way life energy being formed. What activates the soul is a compounded energy to be considered eternal because we know that it cannot be dissipated or dispersed, but it may be passed from one body to another, which brings about the potentiality of biological science to arrive at the origins of life one day or another.
Still in Book II Aristotle tries to sustain the theory that all animals possess sense perception and perhaps imagination since the latter is the product of human thought still very much unknown to science. Nevertheless, beside the ability to feel pleasure and pain and distinguish a house from a tree, animals may be recognized with various forms of linguistic intelligence, which is the theoretical initiation of basic Aristotle’s logic and Hegel’s phenomenology. The rationality of the soul is discussed in Book III, which grants the human soul a limitless capacity opening the prospect of anthropology. The ability to think and retain ideas in memory and to act upon them progressively, which is an exclusive capacity of the human brain from a biological and intellectual point of view not granted to common animals whose behavior must rest on simpler necessities for the survival of their species. The intellect is not just a common storehouse, but a special one that places every object in the proper order and allows logical conceptual thinking and causal movement, which he refers to as “the agent” of all possible actions.
Ultimately, the argument on the “immortality” of the souls makes sense though it is built on metaphysical assumptions. According to him, ‘immortality’ of the soul should rest solely on the fact that the soul does not possess, like the other faculties, a thinking organ to sustain it. Spontaneity is a brain function that must arise by gathering energy here and there or from human feelings arising from substantial values. However, for this reason it is free to live without boundaries, which renders it “immaterial” and like magnetic energy in space can be here, there and nowhere to be seen or found. An overall synthetic thinking may be the only way possible to be reached through phenomenological means. Nevertheless, what constitutes ‘first living principle’ of existence is also what allows us to believe in its immortality questioned by many philosophers and critics of logical thinking. We have a soul because we are alive and able to think.
In the 5th Tractate, 2nd Ennead, Plotinus simply makes a distinction between two qualities determining the principles of “actuality” and that of “potentiality” of the soul. The two principles are not dichotomous, but consequential, meaning that once the first becomes clear in the perceiving mind, the second becomes consequential and causational. Our main consideration would be to determine whether we want art to belong to the first, the second category, both or a category of its own encompassing neither the first or the second principle of existence.
‘Actuality’ signifies true existence, while potentiality exists in the realm of sense and imagination as something to become intentional or something else with the participation of human action, like “bronze may be seen as potentiality of a statue, says Plotinus. The distinction of these qualities does not render the realm of sense totally abstract. It clearly defines our capacity to imagine an actual thing, which is to become something else and produce new ideas and new actuality. This is why Plotinus expresses preference for the “embodied” actuality, rather than the “disembodied” actuality, i.e., presumably that which exists as potens of being.
In the fourth Tractate, Sec.2, Plotinus deals with the notion of authenticity, which will later be expanded by Heidegger to signify the truthfulness of Dasein’s model of existential being. The greatest sign of authenticity is given by whatever belongs to the universe as essential matter. Plotinus divides universal forms in two categories both deriving from the essential and inessential universe as mothers of all beings enveloped in their own boundaries. It is hard to believe that such immensity of space was once and still is “authentic” void not contained to allow the universe to expand.
Plotinus, in this Tractate seems to want to remind us that totality and actuality are what we realize as true independent potentialities demanding the actualization we realize in the mind is not beyond possibility, i.e., beyond what is still unknown to us that does not appears in our constructive imagination as totality of being. The question is that we will never know what is encompassed in the totality of being, perhaps the entire universe, which may not include the void beyond space perception.
The important thing is to live in the present in order to embody reality as a whole and leave open the constructive imagination for future becoming. For this reason Plotinus is telling us to stay with the reality of being in whatever thought and whatever action may establish consonant coexistence since, “ Being cannot lodge in non-Being, but, if anything, non-Being within Being” and in what follows an analogy with the notion of the social artist is mandatory
Being, then, is present to all Being;
an identity cannot tear itself asunder;
the omnipresence asserted of it must be presence
within the realm of Being; that is, it must be
a self-presence. And it is in no way strange that
the omnipresence should be at once self-abiding
and universal; this is merely saying omnipresence within
a unity. (4TH Tractate, Sec. 2)
This is great teaching toward the anthropology of art. Reality is truth, which moves cognition and genetic movement to the right direction this is not in opposition to Husserl’s phenomenological reduction] Being to the sense of being known to one self and to others, which would signifies underestimation of the sensible incarnation and what counts for us, anthropologically speaking.
Being to the sense-known and therefore to think of omnipresence in terms of the concrete, and in our overestimation, sensible apprehensions, we must question how that other Nature can reach over such vastness of space;
but our great is small, and this, small to us, is great;
it reaches integrally to every point of our universe- or,
better, our universe, moving from every side
and in all its members towards this, meets it everywhere
as the omnipresent All ever stretching beyond. (ib.)
About the future of the universe, Plotinus predicted a stop to accept “subordination” and still assert its presence.
1. This shows how advanced in thought and imagination Plotinus was, to foresee an expanding universe, which was recently discovered by astronomers after nearly 2,300 years.
2. At this point there seems to be a contradiction from a phenomenological standpoint, for Plotinus expands the concretion of being to the “omnipresence,“ which may well be an error of translation. In fact the “concrete” can only be realized by sense-knowing (perception), which is unlimited and never reaches concretion.
Raffaele Martini Pandozy, Ph.D. July 2017
This writer, inspired by Aristotle’s Physics, makes specific reference to his thought and ideas, identifying the special correlations from his book on physics, which I am now applying to art history. Art history will not survive the demise if its narrative if it does not permeate human substance and the reality it projects in the human mind. Historians must not alienate themselves from the reality and actuality of art and make specific reference to the science of history arising from the causality of human nature. The reason for this important statement is a reminder that art is a human product and artists are humans like any other human being. Most of all that art and life are cannot be estranged without upsetting the order of things. First of all, the historian must analyze reality before arriving at the characterization of an art event and strengthen the correlation of art and life because the laws of physics apply to things and to people’s minds as well. Aristotle sustains that for every form of existence there must be a “cause.” Until one arrives by causal logic at the ends of all material movements cannot say to have identified reality as it occurs in the world from beginning to end. To arrive at the original “unmoved mover,” namely, the complete circular causality of the history of things, at times opens up questions, which will remain unanswered and perhaps destined to remain open for discussion for years to come. This says that all causes must be brought out as much as possible within a synthetic contextual historical discourse for they are the propelling forces, of the endless circularity of historical time.
Like all physical things existing in the universe, human substance can be measured quantitatively and qualitatively according to mathematical and epistemological principles. It can be placed into relation with general physical laws defining all forms of existence in time, which can give us an idea of where we are anthropologically. For any kind of movement of physical existence the causal elements are always the same: force, time and space, but when it comes to human existence, the elements extend to the realm of phenomenology and psychology, for humans are guided by their thoughts, their habits and inclinations. In order to characterize every type of existence a particular and complex causality should be considered among many intricate intermingling forces working for and against each other. We may begin with the generalization of ‘ideas’ in particular, but not with human actions, which can come into being by many causes. The causality of action is what brings the object into being. From a physical standpoint, a work of art is no different from an ordinary object except for a work produced by an intellect in action, which is a complex compound of forces originating from everywhere and bringing the process to imaginable forms. The intellect is the instrument determining whether, for example, a piece of abstract art can be brought to a reason or even to a non-reason for being. An object can be moved by complex solicitations or various forces like an idea is moved by many causes, which contribute to its predication. Substance is what characterizes the reality and congeniality of an object. An object cannot be transposed into another time or another historical environment and retain the same value. Accordingly, Aristotle refers to movement of time as a causal factor, which can be perceived in relation to changing objects, but did not consider the substantial force engaging the perceptual activity, namely the subjectivity of the subject. For instance, one cannot assess human validity in objects art with accuracy without considering all factual psychological and epistemological components of the artist. Accuracy of judgment is what art history demands in relation to circumstantial cultural time changes, which may be transitory or perennial. Otherwise, works of art may not be considered substantial historical markers, not without first assessing the human substantial movement in time. For the same reason they cannot be considered valuable because made in another time and with different purpose and criteria.
Yesterday is no longer today, which will no longer be tomorrow. Thus, in this case the movement of time must be associated with some sort of value that has nothing to do with time movements in our social system. The logical question that arises after this consideration is how human energy could ever be related to a kind of history that is not there? We do not have a clear conception of value concerning human energy because we do not understand entirely how we are affected by a-causal notions. That is why we need a true and clear conception of history. For this reason, sensuous beauty and psychology can only enjoin the pure fiction concept, and like astrology, they may reflect fantasy and not science, which in principle purports real human value. In addition, since time could not be exhausted, the natural movement of substance comes to an end when it is not nurtured like a young baby. That is why, when we read art history books we come to a sad realization that it did.
A clear distinction though between artists, who are substantial movers of higher thoughts and ideologies, and artists, who are being induced by subjective narrative and historicity remains unchanged and it is now given an explanation. What the writer is about to say must therefore be placed in proper context. Thought is what should move the arts toward their own potentiality, but adverse thought may offer resistance matching the Aristotelian term of “unmoved mover”. As human entities, artists must overcome their own inertia, what Aristotle calls “passive potentiality,” which is inability to think and to act within their proximate social context, makes us think to a constellations in a circumscribed universe. Under the influence of a productive environment, like a good existential philosophy of being, any thought may produce a specific force that initiates a well-planned action. Truly existential thought is necessary to understand causation of action because there can be no action without planning or it would result in a waste of energy. Many times, scientific reasoning may be applied and sometimes not. Therefore, a reawakening of thought in the arts will not be just a historical landmark, but will do a lot of good for the arts and humanity as a whole. Proper action must follow formulation of thought in the mind propelling the intentional will with clarity and distinction, clarifying what the action wants to accomplish, or the action will make no sense. Lack of thought is lack of desires, values, principles and ideals. In other words, one must find a necessity to move his or her thoughts and bring about the extended potentiality of being before the mind. Once the thought is underway the subject becomes another person, for thought itself is a mover of the mind and of one’s own body and the bodies of others producing changes in the world.
This definition of reality was provided by Aristotle analogically almost 2,400 years ago. What causes a physical brain to be charged with energy and to produce thought is the solicitation of a motive, a purpose or a desire, which speak about particularity of being having a vision, not a dream, distinguishing and improving the work of art by constituting direction and purpose. This means that the language that produces the energy to move the body must be grafted in the mind of the subject with accuracy in order to reassure the way the next movement must take place. Consciousness is what provides proper reason to works of art to exist and to produce the right energy that moves ideas from point A to point B successfully. i.e., this is done by a specific method, which in our case is offered by “phenomenology.” Phenomenology is the new thing that helps the understanding of reality and allows the subject to penetrate the dynamics of phenomena, which include the phenomena of art becoming a language capable of communicating human values. This equals to expansion of perceptual reality. In sum, phenomenology opens and expands the perception of reality so that the artist can interact with the world in a better and more constructive critical manner. Art is a meta-critical endeavor because it embodies universal reality and interacts at the level of high human values. The being of art is a potential natural energy that infuses the lymph necessary to support the creative spirit of art and the true feelings of congenial form of freedom, which makes the artist feeling like being needed more in the world. This is the type of purpose that identifies with the need of artists being loved by others aiming at one’s own becoming, not just for the sake of change, as it has happened in the historicity of art, but for the sake of the realization of the potentiality within the subject’s own nature (kata phusin). This is why we must give higher meaning and a just reason to the emerging human spontaneity, which accounts for the knowledge that supplies the mind with the motion of thought and the potentiality for change.
A change in the world can be natural or unnatural, induced by natural or artificial forces and this is what has happened in the course of the history of Modern Art. Artists have made no distinction between constructive and destructive causality. They began to advance ideas that had no place within human reason and rational cognition which introduced ‘passive potentiality’ into the discourse of art. As a result, the notion and the perception of art have been dispersed until they lost meaning and significance. From the 1960s until now, artists have been treated like producer of commodities by their consumers. What these bourgeoisie consumers want is only the simplistic pleasure of limited decorative values, which have nothing to do with greater powers of the intellect. For this reason for almost 200 years, the meaning of fine art has been characterized by poor intellectual quality, and for much too long, the public mind forgot that there is a historical legacy with the glory of the Renaissance, which could have kept the creative spirit alive. Such legacy, no one can deny that could have inspired and helped produce master pieces, rather than the mediocre production housed in modern museums and public collections. To remedy this condition, we must regain the full significance of art’s human potentiality whenever is applicable even in the face of contrary disposition of art’ subjective narrative and historicity. As reparation of these disruptive conditions we must now recognize art’s natural and intrinsic capacity for change and not let the bourgeoisie reduce the creative spirit again to mere production for the sake of material ends. New creative energy will have to emerge from somewhere other than commerce in order to advance the notion of a “new humanism” in the artist and apply all the energies toward this end. Without taking into consideration that truth (aletheia) lies in the essence of nature, as Aristotle mentioned in De coelo the latter should be captured and retained by any work of art, or the result will be a continuous waste of energy.
Any movement of human energy is in actuality a potential force in need of explanation. The concept of energy is that it is never lost, but it may be misapplied when certain principles are not met. Principles are given to us by the in-exhaustive manifestation of phenomena reflecting the natural laws, which develop as chains of various types of events, psychological and down-right contingent like accidental events causing the tragedies that afflict our world today. These are causal factors generated by empirical philosophical presuppositions. Empirical philosophy has made no contribution toward establishing true human values that would have made this a better world simply because it did not penetrate the causal dynamics of social phenomena. Psychology was just as inactive and inefficient in producing the principle of an organized rational society.
The arts did even less as they pretended to live in another world. Had phenomenology being developed before the industrial revolution, today we would be living in a different world. We need to allow the “movers” of society, which include artists, to consolidate the elements of reality by way of logical reduction, which saves mental energy at the end and brings the action to the essential level of values, which are still printed in the books of the past and are still valid in this time and age.
The analytical elements of the natural method of phenomenology remain the intrinsic principles anchored to the conceptual structures of reality. It is up to us to identify them to help our perceptions of phenomena of all kinds at the physical and psychological level acting in a comprehensive substantive manner and assuring the truth of truth, which art must endeavor. The truth of truth can only be taken on causally and comprehensively taking in full consideration the entire natural history of mankind, not leaving anything out in terms of passive ‘retarding potentiality,’ which only phenomenology can establish to help our judgments of reality. Not to let a phenomenology of art take its course, would be like replacing human nature with a surrogate that alters the natural extensive causality encompassing human life, which would bring lethargy and intellectual poverty. The law of causality of nature regulates the intrinsic, extensive field of necessity of the mind down to the core of the unconscious phenomena that interact beyond our control, like the unexplored universe of memory. This thought ought to remind us of the unexplored inter-connection and substantial interaction at all times in order not to underestimate their incongruous vicissitudes. Causality is God’s will and the cement of the universe for everything exists for a cause. We cannot deny that we are only little dots in the universal space.
Aristotle’s De Caelo seems to expand this discourse, by enlarging his definition of phenomenal motion. He places human energy in the right context as to produce a special harmony with the general natural energy of the ether. This effort seems to advocate a conception of art in perfect harmony with the natural environment. Modern science will not succeed in devising artificial intelligence as it will not succeed in changing our nature. In order to do any good, science will have to appropriate the full causality of nature and design its products according to it.
Forced motions and resistance to natural forces could not exist for us without causal reasons especially if we fail to relate our actions to our intrinsic natural disposition. Aristotle advances the ideas that to one natural force corresponds another contrary one called ‘forced motion’ of resistance, but also a proper way to overcome it. This should not be construed as an occurrence in the logical approach of “art for a purpose,’ which unites, rather than separate human energy and integrates the human potential in the context of the potentiality of nature. In this way science can find a proper remedy like the empathy of thermodynamics. Similarly, there are contrary forces even in society that will place obstacles in the route toward the realization of a phenomenology of art. The way to overcome these obstacles is to reinforce ideas of social potential and direct them to a proper dynamic context, like grafting a plant to achieve the desired fruit. Of course, Aristotle foresees a different outcome when dealing with rectilinear and circular motions, but he is thinking in terms of geometric forms to which mathematical calculus apply. In nature, forms of quantification may not be left concealed or unforeseen for mathematical reflection cannot afford to leave out the smallest quantification. Being too small or too large to calculate makes no sense to mathematicians, for even the smallest force can lead to unpredictable sources. However. in art there is no tool to measure a work of art qualitatively, though the final end is what ultimately counts, which is art for the sake of humanity.
Since he says nothing how to cope with these interfering minute forces, we are invited not to consider such necessity until we recognize that they may affect the essential theory of motion in art, which would bring to a stop the consideration of essential values. However he warned that a scientific assessment of this reality before us is to be taken keeping in mind natural values as opposed to their basic preservation rather than allowing them to be overcome by artificially, because it would implant anomalous forms of culture.
Toward the identification of reality there is one more thing to consider. In his book on Physics, Aristotle argues that all motions are regulated by causality and precisely by the four causes, material, formal, efficient, and final causes. His theory also finds application in the realization of a work of art. His analysis of causes is very important for edifying a progressive and constructive theory of art because it is central to the questions of providing a purpose and a direction for art and artists. This the best and most complete argument one can advance to identify reality and produce the right assessment toward building a logical structure in art. Today, with the advancement of science we can answer more complex questions than before that reflect the four causes of the reality of nature and offer a large perspective of time and space to stretch the future of art in the world or to expand the perception of objects and ideas of art in the proper perspective. The idea of employment and application of Aristotle’s conception of causality precisely serves us to keep the good perspective in all our judgments and decisions to be made to bring into this world the proper rational dimension of art.
Aristotle’s four causes are above all fundamental to our cognition, perception and consciousness of the world – all necessary ingredients for the actor aiming at the final result of his or her art object. The actor (the artist) can apply them in just about any field of life or in art and see exactly where he or she stands as an endemic practicing subject of reason predicating in support of productive substantial meaning.
In analyzing their application in art, we find that the material cause, which is strictly physical because it refers to material objects, includes the hands that handle them; the formal cause which refers to the sense of shape deals with spatial or linguistic relations; the efficient cause is interactive from a non-autonomous actors contributing to the final realization of the work of art; and the final cause, which integrates the object in the teleological context in which the subject must operate, is often the silent a priori. It starts and ends with anticipating the scope or the purpose of the action supporting the realization of the object.
All four causes must be advanced in the planning stage of the work of art for the following reasons:
The first cause must support the substantial conceptual ideas of the material to be moved or transformed from stage A to stage B, i.e., to the final stage. The motion of ideas must encompass and withstand the applied force, which must be proportioned and sufficient to actualize the desired modifications of the original formal conditions of the object. This cause is important because is the premise of the other three causes that follow. It requires rational, adequate choice, at times with the intervention of philosophy, mathematics, physics, biology, etc. For instance, wood has characteristics different from bronze, plastic, and other substances. Each must receive a special different treatment. This consideration will obviously condition the entire interventions that follow.
The second cause, the formal, must have content, meaning and function. There is not such a thing as form for the sake of itself because forms to a certain extent must speak to us about their content to make mind and body comfortable. Imagine an inform couch, a distorted flower that has lost its geometry and symmetry – it will consequently speak of irregularity and under performance. Plato’s bed reflecting a good design that delivers comfort and aesthetic pleasure, at the same time pleases the eye. The purpose of art is aesthetic because it is also practical in terms of advancing human intelligence. (See chapter 6). If the bed cannot accommodate the human body, it will not reflect natural forms, just as art, because of its complexity, encourages intellectual development. Forms of any kind are language and expressions of what we are and to communicate feelings and emotions to others, as explained in the preceding chapters. Forms signify and justify human conditions, or as Saussure understands them, they are the “signified,” seen and interpreted empirically because they carry meaning and content of values, but they have their intrinsic linguistic phenomenology, on which they stand, which is the reason they exist. They demand a general holistic and particular analytical interpretation, which defines a branch of philosophy. Philosophy of language takes into consideration all three elements: content, meaning and function to provide specific contextual signification of sentences, but phenomenology does a better job exploring the causality of linguistic forms.
The third cause, the efficient, provides the required force necessary to accomplish the specific event, or intellectual movement. To explain such concept, suffices to say that one is not going to use a tractor if he or she needs to move a chair. In this respect, we must imagine the employment of tools and other equipment in action to share the necessary labor and the understanding of what this cause is about. Heidegger speaks about the “equipmental qualities of equipment” referring to Aristotle’s third dimensional causation and Schopenhauer as indirect action. Further, to better explain the economy of the action of efficient cause, one may bring about the notion of intermediate instrumentality and imagine a train going from London to Paris avoiding Dublin or Lion, which are out of the way. The sufficiency of judgment of these two options seems very obvious, but very often in life we realize how much energy we waste in actions that are not worth the while. The efficient cause arises as a logical solution, but at times it must be researched and the research may go through the various options and calculations necessary to find convenience and best results combined toward saving energy and producing the best results.
The fourth cause, the final is not the ultimate human end, for time is timeless and space is unlimited; it is not the end of the motion either, because the world is a planet in perennial motion around the sun because of the tremendous gravity exercised by same, and has been so for billions of year. Its speed of rotation cannot be measured with exactitude, judging from the theory of relativity, but it is constant as the human calendar proves. This cause is hypothetically final according to our limited vision and our limited understanding of time and space relations until something drastic event, like a meteorite entering the gravity field will cause imbalance and displacement of masses and perhaps the end of the world. At that point, the world could travel in space and enter into another orbital system. The final cause implies this eventuality, which would not render it final until we determine the totality of its effects. As a result, nothing is final in the universe. If we are satisfied with the results of a material or mental movement, it would only be temporary and not eternal. This indicates that we have arrived at a partial conclusion or to a new conceptual theory or stratagem of an endless action in the universe. We can start saying that we cannot accomplish our goal of understanding the final necessity of all things as a premise of reality. With this in mind, somehow we feel satisfied with the result of an action or a movement until we can become more confident and see the true finality of motion. In order to turn our theory into action, it may be necessary to implicate other subject matters that enter the field of action and review the finality of the cause. Final causes will not put an end to human endeavors as life continues to allow the mind to expand the confines of space perception. When the theory is infinite, there will always be a next endeavor for nothing is perennial as long as the manifestation of time and space remains open.
This is the general causal structure of reality, but artists must deal with besides their own psychological inclinations before initiating the movement that will leads to the completion of a work of art. Insecurity of mind may arise during the process and the first preoccupation would be to build a sense of social belonging as a solid base to go back to in difficult moments. It must be stated that such security has not been provided by the history of art. In a moment of desperation, there seems to be nowhere to go or to recur at any time especially when self-confidence begins to fail. Heidegger spoke of several forms of anxiety affecting his model of dasein, who went through experiencing the vicissitudes of the world. He refers to the psychological causes determined during the production of a work of art as well, in Poetry, Language and Thought, but the important thing is to have a clear vision of purpose to overcome the uncertainties, which are many. However, the final cause must be envisioned and set as a priori condition to all that may come after. Final causes are what signify purpose and furnish the necessary commitment to exercise the profession without compromises.
All things considered, one must approach the white canvas with a plan and a certain conceptual confidence, conscious awareness, imagining an ideal world. To use synthetic reflection on the past and projection on future development may be the way to satisfy both worlds of necessity: the social thirst for novelty and the advancement of the conceptual idea of art. Conceptual awareness belongs to the final Aristotelian cause because is serves as a premise of pre-conceptual structure of intentionality, and as a concluding result of the action. Somehow, as we will realize much later in the book, a certain similarity with Heidegger’s concept of the “equipmental quality of equipment” does exist.
1. Aristotle’s Concept of Movers and Unmoved Movers from the Book of “Physics” and the Artist as Mover of the World
This argument is set forth under the criterion that all movements, physical, psychological, cognitive and even perceptual occur under the same dynamics and that therefore there are strict correlations between events, physical bodies and minds, which make the laws of motility applicable in any movement of objects as well as minds. We know for a fact that art and artists are potentially mind movers, for an image, they say, may be worth 1,000 words. Images are linguistic representations, which can embody human, ideals, beliefs, feelings and emotions that move bodies and mind. Powerful images have been instrumental in the French and Russian revolution and have shaped our civilization for better or for worse. The power of images rests on their linguistic form and capacity to induce human action, which much depend on the creative intelligence and interpretive capacity of the artist producing them. Equally, a symbol is representation of specific beliefs, a sense of belonging, like religion, liberty and an icon representing special human virtues, while a sign is a conceptual form stating commands, logos identity and representation, embodying specificity and particularity of functions. Each of these representations are given particular meaning when applied in art, for instance, more than the Pop representations of the “Brillo Box: the “Coor Beer” or the portrait of “Marylin Monroe,” which are limited to cultural denotations. Images, signs and symbols, all possess a special sociological and humanistic force that can be measured by the potential movements of human progress and whether they are able to move minds in the right directions. In sum, they are the instruments that artists may use to move anthropology forward.
Art and artists can then be seen as vectors of force and movers that can help change the world when embody and project certain type of substance to others. As Aristotle mentions ours is a teleological natural world of actuality and potentiality where each individual has a purpose to contribute to the common good interactively in the best way he or she can. We are talking about a world of possibilities, not a world of dreams and fantasies. The instruments of representation must possess the potentiality to produce changes or they are not instruments but toys. These instruments do not come from inspiration or from metaphysical-esoteric sources. They come from real substantial necessity to improve our kind of life in every way. Changes, not necessarily have to occur accidentally, like many artists believe, they can be thought out and planned according to natural laws. Full knowledge of nature must be acquired under the auspices of a conscious intentionality before approaching the white canvas or the marble block. The art object should deserve to be treated like the plan of an architect applying sound ideas. Aristotle studied motions of all bodies of the universe and discovered that which each entity, comprising mass and volume an adequate force is necessary to move it and to win its static resistance. Analogically, in this study, we pass from physics to psychology via phenomenology to produce an example that bodies and minds can be moved toward the right direction. Their, spirit and culture can be conquered and directed toward a unity of purpose . The purpose is help make this a better world, a world not difficult to envision or to imagine when universal values abide in our minds and have reached a mature existential consciousness in the artist.
In this sense, the definition of motion acquires meaning from the actuality and potentiality of the mover experiencing the desire for changes and investing the object with the required intellectual force of intentionality. The mover must win the unmoved obstacles in order to actualize changes. A mover must possess adequate force to move the object to destination. The force should be sufficient to overcome the passive resistance that interferes with the object’s motion for change. The kind of force must be such to meet the nature of the object. This is a discourse validating possibilities in every field of philosophy, psychology, physics and sociology. When this concept is applied in the human sciences, the mass is overcome by the object’s brain substance and the obstacles is eliminated by natural logic. Cultural dispositions are often contrary to the logic of nature because there are no ideal social structures, or the world would be entirely different. A static mind is like an object at rest unable to produce the right force to move others. In physics and chemistry, the potentiality of the force used must be adequate and meet the nature of the object’s intrinsic molecular structure. At the molecular level 1Kg. of coal, for instance, can generate 12 KWh of energy. The same amount of uranium can generate 24 Million times such amount. The necessary potential energy must adequately meet and not overwhelm the nature of the object to be moved or natural disasters are assured. The two materials possess diverse molecular structure, which require different methods to liberate energy. Coal must be burned, while Uranium must be bombarded with high speed flux of electrons. Today’s environment is out of balance because technological progress requires too much energy. Natural disasters occur because human have through the years liberated an excessive amount of energy from the earth—energy stored for billions of years. This is to say that there has to be sufficient and a specific methodology for art to produce congenial changes in the world.
We have now almost proved that the same laws of physics can be accounted in art and in psychology to move people in the right direction. According to Aristotle, the nature of the force must meet the nature of the object, in which case the change is natural (phusei) or according to nature (kata phusin). Changes can also happen in the face of a contrary nature or disposition on the object or according to non-natural conditions—in which case the changes are forced or contrary to nature (para phusin).
A natural change can occur with minimum force when the latter meets the nature of the object. A displaced natural kind, though temporarily out of control, such is the perception of art at the present historical moment, can be corrected and addressed toward the congenial nature. That is why one must be hopeful to provide a contribution to changes in the world. One could be more hopeful if this belief were commonly shared by others. A major presupposition from Aristotle’s mind was that the division between the natural and the unnatural is exhaustive and that there can be no changes to which the nature of the entity would be indifferent or neutral if the force and the entity are fundamentally congenial. The congenial force requires intelligence and knowledge. The fundamental values of life must be studied and moved by causal necessity because nature and human nature can be susceptible to all kinds of solicitations regardless of their potential nature, which demonstrates the chaos and insecurity of modern society. As a matter of fact, distortion of natural principles can be seen almost everywhere. The major consideration behind such a presupposition is that the principles of nature can be recognized everywhere and we should not ignore them but apply them to regulate our behavior accordingly. This realization arises from a phenomenological analysis that gauges the general problematic conditions of the mind in a comprehensive manner, and not merely partially from an external standpoint. Consequently, it can teach psychology the parameters of reason. Such analysis is necessary to allow the natural force to activate changes from the inside out of the object and keep the unnatural force out of the line of action, preventing it to interact from an external point far from the molecular at the intra-molecular level.
In physics, any force acting on matter, in order to be effective, must interact with the object at the molecular level, altering its core structure, while in neurology when the force is acting on the mind from an external point, it must interact in a substantive manner. This is how art could speak at the heart of humanity with a unified substantial voice. No changes in the entity will occur without the interactive causality of substance, which in the case of art is strictly cognitive of universal validity. If the force does not engage the entity from within, changes will not occur because language cannot exploit the interactive potentiality of neural energy. As a result, the entity will remain atrophic until the more vigorous force arrives. The latter is a reflection of art and art history affecting the course of anthropology superficially.
No beneficial changes have occurred in the last 100 years either because the force exercised by the object of art was insufficient or because the nature of the idea and the perception of art were not stimulated and remained passive. Analogously, this phenomenon has occurred in the history of the world when psychology, philosophy and science could not share a common ground.
Before arriving at the core of this argument, it is necessary to make a general analysis as to how science and technology are to be identified as para phusin and why they have moved against human nature, bringing about dangerous beliefs and ideas for the sake of innovation before safety and experience. Two hundred years away from the industrial revolution science and technology have done the kind of damage that has not been done in thousands of years. This motion is in reverse, which we cannot call it progress, for it has brought all kinds of health and environmental problems to the world.
The question now is to determine the nature of the object and then determine the adequate kind and quantity of force to apply to bring back the needed awareness of natural laws. It is obvious that Aristotle, a colossal thinker, considered a number of variables in his theory of motion, which brought different results from situations of inadequate force, which we cannot consider.
In the book on Physics Aristotle expands his argument of movers and unmoved to celestial constellations. The para phusin forces, according to him are not just contrary to nature, but are somehow disingenuous insofar they produce distorted manifestation of contingent phenomena that do not conform to natural geneses. The resulting forces can thus be multifarious. It is the same in the social sphere, but since human disciplines of knowledge are interdisciplinary and imagination is somehow infinite, contingent phenomena are too complex to bring to a rational structural argument. Had Aristotle lived in this time and age, he could not have written a relational book on critical psychology and on technology because of the inextricable behavior of our modern world. Not even the four causes, the material, formal, efficient and final would apply to a discipline of behavior whose variables fall under a cluster causality impossible to construe. A theory of impossible contingent causes, like several psychologists have attempted, such about dreams and the unconscious, have failed miserably to provide understanding and reliability. For example, nothing can be construed looking at an irrational world under the threat of nuclear war and escalating terrorism emanating from some crazy individuals. The Modern age proved that the human mind is in a maze of innumerable and contrasting ideas causing irreparable damage to the logic of thought, which has been for so long forgotten or misapplied. Under these circumstances empiricism, that which makes distinctions of appearances, is no longer a philosophy, but acceptance and recognition of the status quo of a distorted reality merely resting on contingent, lawless behavior.
Again Aristotle says in De Coelo mentions that two opposing forces eventually will annihilate one another. This notion is perhaps most significant in this type of discourse of specific correlation with art’s distorted behavior as to be considered insignificant from a phenomenological standpoint because they oppose rational thought and the cultivation of true human substance. At this point, one cannot foresee at a distance of time, which of these two forces, namely, subjectivism or humanism will actually coalesce. We can make a distinction between the two because they are essentially dichotomous and demonstrate their pros and cons with objectivity. While the former is essentially a search for self-ingratiation, the latter remains attached to the development of real human values and therefore should be adopted. However, it is obvious that we must maintain some sort of distance between these two cultural forces imagining certain conditions of space and the intersecting straight and circular vectors, which come to augment or diminish the intensity and the outcome of changes in the world. This is perhaps what Aristotle meant by “locomotion”– not perhaps one force, but a number of forces running against the sole single force of nature.
In Book 8 of Physics Aristotle argues that for each motion there has to be a mover. In cases of forced motion, the movers may be present in a perspicuous way. It is hard to single out the mover in a collective social action and determine illogical tendency of behavior. This is true in art and in the social organism. However, in order to operate a reduction to a natural motion, there has to be a catharsis. Apart from the cases where the nature of the entity is at the same time a moving and efficient cause, i.e., apart from living beings, whose nature and the soul, are both formal and efficient causes, the motion must be brought to be viewed as a single vector of substance. This is eminently so, in spite of the remaining mixed motions of psychological contingencies.
The catharsis is needed in order to free the essential elements of the natural motion, but the complex causal contingency engages a type of ballast that prevents actualization of the potentiality of the object of art. One could make the right art, which would eventually be ignored or fought against to maintain market supremacy and prevent material losses. In this passage, the correlation is quite simple. At this point, the object represented by the final humanistic end of art, remains confused until opposing forces obscure it even more and a halo of cultural complexity alienates it from the social environment. At that point, it is almost sure that art will lose its historic glorious past and will be reduced to the level of low commodity.
The inner principles of causal forces preventing the demise of the art world remain for the moment locked in a steel box inactive and motionless, but when the artist is deprived freedom of expression even a steel box may explode like the bag of a kamikaze. It is up to the masses to determine what would be better to sacrifice the real potentiality of the object of art and allow the powerful materialism to prevail or to give up middle class material values and preserve the integrity of the idea of art and its historic legacy. It is a fact that the system of support of the arts is corrupted to the core. Materialism is an opposing and invincible para phusin force that moves against the spiritual nature of art and its potential becoming as well. Perhaps no compromise will ever be reached unless art scholars embracing the right realm of thought will encourage the ‘movers’ of art to perform their motions. Moreover, Aristotle adduces that the principle of causational synonymy rules out that any non-homogenous mass, without an internal substance would still be able to move against substantial nature. This is the constant and irreducible threat facing the art of today. This is so because, chances are that one part of a non-homogeneous body will move against another good spirit and changes in the art world will never occur.
We all know by now that art sooner or later will be bound to reach its final destiny of greatness in the world, This is not a wish but a necessary logos defining the human’s creative spirit, which is a gift from God. Any type of intolerance against a principle that Aristotle call “locomotion” is bound fail, for art’s legitimate and natural mission will not succumb to material forces. It is to be wished that a reawakening of thought in art will provide greater reason to open the understanding and the perception of the potentiality of the object of art and to grow as continuous eternal motion of greatness and excellence. This sentiment should indeed be studied in particular as a remedy to shine same positive light in the present darkness of world view. Positivity is a necessity, which must answer the question as to why the object of art should not encounter resistance toward reaching its natural place. Art belongs to the highest human endeavor and it is somehow unthinkable that someone will make it impossible for it to reach its final destination or to deliver its message to humanity. At times, obstacles are difficult or impossible to remove or even to circumvent, but if it is removed the one actor must bear causal responsibility and be engaged in the struggle until the message reaches its destination.
In sum, Aristotle’s law of ‘locomotion,’ from here to there and from now to then, is a secure movement toward the destiny of the superiority of human thought. The motion has been disrupted for 200 years in art by confused, mindless movers, who disrupted the evolutionary intellectual movement that distinguished the intelligent, humanistic art of the Renaissance. Now it is the time to readdress these issues, especially after recent neurological research that puts the creative art process at the forefront of human evolution. Once this idea is established, art and artists will be recognized by their true capacity and will be truly free to pursue the creative spirit granted by the will of God, the first mover and implement a broad interdisciplinary knowledge into their work. Aristotle, Galileo and Newton went on studying celestial systems of causality like the solar constellations and demonstrated how the planets are intrinsically bound by the magnetism of just one star, the sun. The planets have reached their point B and terminated their ‘locomotive’ movements and since the “Big Ban” have been regulated by the balance of their internal forces, which does not allow solicitation from outside systems. This says that there is no place for accidental mover in a closed system, which would interfere with the ‘locomotion’ of an object, in this case a meteorite would not collide against any of the planets of the solar system and cause a catastrophic explosion. Should this occur, with great probability the supreme force of the sun’s magnetism will incorporate it into the solar system like an aggregate new planet. This is not fiction, but science emerging from Aristotelian studies.
Humans are perhaps tiny dots in the universe, but they nevertheless a part of the solar system. Similarly, we must recognize that the idea of art, not judging from the production of the last 200 years, still possesses the potentiality and actuality of the same ‘locomotive’ force of its glorious past, which Aristotle spoke about and there is nothing that the ‘unmoved’ forces can do to oppose it. The destiny of art, like all potential forces in the universe, is not only to move from point A to point B, but to contribute to the “order of things,” which is M. Foucault’s universal theory suggested. However, the moving object of art’s actuality and potentiality must be recognized in order for the motion to bring changes in the world.
Raffaele M. Pandozy. Ph.D.
July 15, 2017