Man, that contempt for the M.S.M runs deep. I'll bet they savaged "Gertrude the Goat " for being ""Sexist" (female character depicted as livestock) "Species-centric" (Presuming competence and right to relate the narrative of another race) Colonialist (obviously) and derivative (a chyldren's story that shys away from tackling the big issues of cis-gender identity in the barnyard).
If Architects contemplated all the time, nothing would ever get done. We would live in mud huts - or caves, since they're already available.
What a nightmare! Philosphy! lol.
I agree that they can go out and pick up the garbage on their lawn/property, but expecting anyone to do major yard work and work on their house when it's still pretty cold out (and rainy and today we're supposed to get freezing rain) is ridiculous.
If you're so anxious to have the place meet YOUR standards, why don't you go and do it, OB?
This is, and was, my field of study. You make so many false assumptions about Modernism (capital M) and contemporary Architecture that I don't even know where to start. Design is about form, context (economic, social, etc) and function - aesthetics, as much as I hate using that term, emerges from their consideration - and trust me, they are considered with rigor. Every Architect wants to make quality buildings. Then came the mega developers...
Besides, Architects don't want to get bogged down by philosophy, and some would argue (I would) that theory has hindered the education process and resulted in some ghastly structures and a crumbling profession.
Modernity says nothing about quality. It's simply a contemporary means of production. You can make good Modern buildings and you can make bad ones.
Buildings have, for the most part, always been useful, and "of their time".
A PHILOSOPHICAL CANCER: ON THE EMPTINESS OF UTILITARIANISM
"We all enjoy the heritage buildings, and hopefully can preserve most of them for use. That's right - USE - buildings are designed to be used." The Future
What is the philosophical subtext here? That's right, it's utilitarianism, the view that value is to be equated with use. If something has no such "use," then it has no value. However, the doctrine of utilitarianism is by no means restricted to the present example of heritage buildings. On the contrary, it is a philosophical cancer which has spread so as to invade every aspect of our society. Let me explain.
The cancer of utilitarianism is THE unquestioned modernist assumption. Its powers of discrimination are universal. Look at the title of this bitch, "Nostalgic Woes." We understand that "woes" means "sorrows" but what about "nostalgia?" A quick check of the Concise Oxford Dictionary reveals that nostalgia is "Home-sickness, as a disease; a sentimental yearning for some period of the past." So the debate is loaded at the outset. Nostalgia is just a "sentimental disease" and that's that. But why is nostalgia a sentimental disease? No reasons are required. It's obvious. Nostalgia has no use-value. It has no utility and utility is that by which everything - yes everything - must be measured. For example, even our sense of humour has become infected with the cancer.
A recent cartoon showed a small group of monks standing on a hillside at dusk witnessing a magnificent sunset. They clapped their hands and cried, "Author! Author!" It was a utilitarian knee-slapper. Why? Because the sunset had no use-value. It had no utility. The monks' contemplation of the sunset was inconceivable to the modernist utilitarian mind-set. In the utilitarian mind-set there is no room for such contemplation. In fact, such contemplation is just simply meaningless. The monks, as a consequence, could only be seen as fools. That is why the cartoon was a utilitarian knee-slapper.
Utilitarianism is itself, of course, simply part of the modern constellation of similar philosophical assumptions. Closely allied is "pragmatism," the view that what matters is not airy-fairy philosophical speculation but rather what works. Truth is that which works. To ask, "Works for what, to what end?" is an otiose question, one that does not even arise in the pragmatic mind. It does not arise because its principles preclude its arising. In the same way "empiricism" - the view that reality consists only of that which can be quantitatively measured - enjoys widespread acclaim. Questions relating to quality rather than simple quantity do not appear on the empiricist screen. Again, empiricism has its close cousins in "positivism," "functionalism," "verificationism" and all the rest. Indeed, today utilitarianism and its allied cancers are philosophically paramount. To even raise questions about them amounts to lunacy, to a dangerous apostasy from the true faith. For the utilitarians are "true believers" and make no mistake.
Sadly, current education, the only possible egress from the utilitarian blight, finds itself under the
coarse pragmatic hand as well. All education which has no use-value is to be rejected! All education which makes appeal to contemplation, to quality rather than just quantity, is to be suppressed! Lacking a narrow utilitarian value, the humanities are just laughable, courses taken only by fools! Where's the money in them? That's the question. Isn't it?
A pleasure as always.
What does everyone think of the new Halifax logo?
I was listening to CBC the other day, and residents of HRM were calling in complaining about the modern buildings, and how they don't "fit" with the historic character and the lighthouses, etc. How we needed to keep the historic character to attract tourists, etc.
It's as if they believe Halifax is the only city in the world that has old architecture and historical remnants. This fascinates me - and terrifies me.
No, Ivan, its just their way.
So, a respectful story about an important issue gets headed with an insulting image and misspelled name that could have been lifted from Fr@nk. Is this the Coast being "edgy" and "independent"?
So many women can relate to this posting but I am interested in what men think? How do they relate? There are alot of single dads out there that have to wear many hats, do they have the same problem? Please post as women everywhere are wanting to know this is not just a gender thing??? Please
Point well made Op
This is an excellent post - and some good points stated
The past should be preserved, but not at the expense of the future
They should pick up their garbage - simple
You shouldn't expect people to tailor themselves to your arbitrary and superficial standards - simple
Taxes aren't the problem - It's how the money is spent
Because you think Hydrogen is a fossil fuel used in our space craft, your argument is invalid.
I love this so much because I can relate completely. Thank you.
I really hope to this is published in the coast.
Flirt a LOT more.
Tell your head to stop building a cage around your desire.
Play on buckaroo!
it all makes sense.
"most intelligent people..."
Weeeeeeell, we *do* call him more-on for a reason, Jhey.
Because you're making an argument out of nothing. EVERYONE understands - wait, most intelligent people - that generalizations don't include everyone.
I can't stand the generalization police, they're almost as bad as the grammar police.
All the beer, all over town
The couple's guide to everything.
Halifax's sex secrets revealed
The Coast's Well Being Guide
Search 100s of Halifax restaurants, bars and cafes
The best of everything Halifax has to offer.
300+ Ways to Live Sustainably
The official handbook to student life in Halifax.
Designers, stores and fashion, all locally-sourced.
2013 Reader Survey results
Interior design and home accessories in Halifax.
Coast Publishing Ltd.