Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

HotpieTargaryen t1_j3xf07p wrote

Yes, that is obvious, but that doesn’t just mitigate the problematic author. Basically all this says is you gan separate the art from the artist as long as your separate the art from the artist. It’s neither novel nor particularly philosophically compelling.


stumblewiggins t1_j3xgfxx wrote

To be clear, I'm not responding to the article, I'm responding to your comment.

This is what I was reacting to: >why would I want philosophy to help people avoid the consequences of their actions and statements.

I don't care what the article says, I'm saying that this comment is missing the point of separating the art from the artist.

It's not about helping people avoid consequences; we can and should hold people accountable for their words and actions.

But if they have contributed work that has artistic, educational, scientific, etc. merit that is valuable to society at large, we should not jettison all of that simply because the person who contributed it has done or said terrible things. We should consider its value separately from it's creator, while also contextualizing it based on the sins of the creator.


HotpieTargaryen t1_j3xizy6 wrote

I am talking about the article because art and science are different. I don’t need to separate art from the artists because as amazing as art can be it doesn’t save lives or change society. Separating science from the scientist is far more palatable and easier since science is built by a tremendous number of people all improving upon or developing that person’s work. Separating art from the artist is not analogous to pretty much any other type of development.


stumblewiggins t1_j3xjztk wrote

>I don’t need to separate art from the artists because as amazing as art can be it doesn’t save lives or change society

Sure it does. Art therapy helps people process pain, trauma, grief, etc.

Works of art inspire revolutions, and change the fabric of society


thune123 t1_j3xkmrn wrote

So you've never read a book, watched a movie or listened to stand up/podcast and had a thought that improved your life? The idea that art has no merit outside of being mindless entertainment is pretty closed minded. I wouldn't be surprised if the average person is more affected by art than by science when it comes to their own personal development. Obviously science impacts their lives indirectly but I would be surprised if it affects their lives more directly than art.


HotpieTargaryen t1_j3xnap1 wrote

It’s not. Art can shape a mind. And if the artists shaping that mind is toxic it matters. Science is attenuated from cultural and individual biases; art isn’t.


thune123 t1_j3xnvza wrote

You sound like you need some art in your life. Or just interaction with humans. You don't really seem to grasp what's going on in the world and how people are. You act like only art has the duality of being good and evil.


HotpieTargaryen t1_j3xopra wrote

I have plenty of art in my life. You sound like you need some empathy, but it’s the internet so I won’t judge. Let’s just go on about our respective lives.


thune123 t1_j3xw66y wrote

It's actually quite humorous that you would bring empathy into this. I assure you, you are the one working with less of it. Just so you don't pat yourself on the back for giving out empathy to the "right people", I am not speaking on exclusively having empathy for the bad actors. I am speaking about having empathy for everyone. But this is a concept lost on people like you because I know you think only people on your side of the street deserve it.

Good day sir.


HotpieTargaryen t1_j3y0dc9 wrote

You need to take a long hard look in a mirror. Good day to you as well.