Makes a commercial medium using science and mathmatics

>makes a commercial medium using science and mathmatics
>calls it art

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=yVsuFQnAHmo
youtube.com/watch?v=2HEGGlYg7_Y
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Define "art" for me, then.

But if you think about it can't all art be reduced to the use of a technical skill?

Art is a stupid concept because it has no objecive meaning, anything you decide is art, it will be for you.

something that isn't mass produced for financial gain

Science and math are also art.

so am i making art by taking a dump?

if you can convince others to call it that

Art thread?
Post fav thrash album.
youtube.com/watch?v=yVsuFQnAHmo

Andy Warhol and the entire nation of Japan says fuck you

Art is for clueless idiots.

youtube.com/watch?v=2HEGGlYg7_Y

warhol is a

H A C K
A
C
K

Don Ensor, Andy Worhol, Harvey Keitel , and Elton John must be lying cunts then.

techné, translated as art/craftmanship, is the application of episteme, the knowledge of principles.
therefore applied science and mathematics is science, a turd in a museum is not

In all the years of 'what is art' retardation I've seen on this site, this has to be one of the worst definitions of art

I don't get it.
So it's a conventional definition, exceptp when it isn't?
It's an extremely arbitrary concept, including this one also very arbitrary exception?!

You realize music is based in science and mathematics as well, right?

Music has existed long before science and mathematics.

Yes, art is subjective
You're making this sound harder than it is

So I make a shitton of things but don't sell them they're art?

And if I make only one thing to sell that's art?

user. No. Science in terms of the scientific theory as it's codified today, perhaps, but the process of discovery and innovation it represents is inherent in human society.

the term is very loose.
history of art and philosophy gives it various descriptions

That doesn't mean that it doesn't used science and mathematics now.
It took science to develop both acoustic and electric instruments while math dictates structure.
Eat shit, pleb.

Video games aren't art, its a GAME

just like how no one considers soccer art

so easy to spot literal liberal imbeciles its disturbing

Uh right. Like science and mathematics never informed art. Let's just ignore the ancient Greeks and their studies of proportion and geometry and how that literally defined western art, shall we? Okay. Go back to sleep goyim

people might consider a soccer stadium art

But vidya was once sold as a general entertainment product along side movies and music.It wasn't until the Crash that it was relegated to the toy sections of stores and targets exclusively at children rather than family units.

Am I literally the only person who finds rules and mechanics aesthetically appealing? Games have those and all the other shit like graphics are obviously an art form so games are art.

So even though video games emply storytelling, visual art, animation, and music, being a game nullifies all of the art forms involved? You're fucking retarded if you believe that.
It's a cohesive experience through multiple art forms. That's art.

I don't think you understand the word aesthetically

>math dictates structure
Math dictates absolutely fucking everything in the universe at the base level. Our understanding of math lets us understand the principles of music, doesn't mean it's based in math and "science", this is just some that is just borderline r/science sophistry.
t. don't play a single instrument

But is it? Your personal evaluation of a specific piece is certainly subjective, but we're talking about a definition here.
If you're going to make a definition subjective it completely defeats the point of trying to define it.

In other words, you can't make a claim such as:
>something that isn't mass produced for financial gain
and them also claim that the definition is subjective. I don't know if you're that dude, but the point stands.

Of course!
That is precisely why this guy asked OP to clarify which definition of the word he was using. And I'm also curious to hear it.
Any discussion is meaningless until we stablish that, even if the point of contention is that definition itself.

>a commercial medium
a what now

It means relating to beauty. I think rules can be beautiful. How is that not an art if the rules are made by people?

So basically what your saying is if you personally define the relation of something and math differently than someone else, they must be wrong. You're retarded. Using your logic, I could say math isn't involved in gaming; it just helps us understand it. You're just avoiding the reality of it.

So everything Michelangelo did wasn't art got ya

It means beauty exclusively in the superficial form

I bet you post this shit unironically, you fucking shameless cunt.

Posting meme comics is not a proper rebuttal user.

What beauty isn't superficial, genius user?

Take art out of video games and you're left with something like TIS-100.

>this thread again

Not him but you're missing the point.
EVENRYTHING is math. Everything is electricity or involves it on a fundamental level. Everything tangible is chemistry to it's very core.

These broad claims don't mean nothing.
Every art form relies heavily on all sorts of scientific principles, but that doesn't mean it's not art.

I guess literature isn't art then?

Something like you just described. Apparently intricate rules give you a hard-on, you consider it beautiful even though it lacks a physical, visible form

We're talking about the meaning of aesthetic, not art dummy

I'm the dude who said if you can make people call it art it is art, but not the comment before about mass-production. I agree, it would be pretty stupid to hold both of those ideas as true.
It's a word with a very fluid definition that is determined both on an individual level and on a broader cultural level. Lots of different definitions, always changing, none more correct than the other. Only some that are less correct

Nobody "makes" a medium from whatever, and nobody calls an entire medium "art".

>what is a golden rectangle

I guess painting isn't an artform guys.

>Math dictates absolutely fucking everything in the universe at the base level.

Math lets you model appearances, it doesn't "dictate" the actual flow of the universe, it just comes closes to imitating it. The universe doesn't follow "mathematical laws" (videogames do), and if it did, it'd be 100% predictable as soon as we came across those laws.

Do people actually think that the world has math equations embedded in it? or that the world will give itself up to some 100% comprehensive equation?

Beauty has nothing to do with whether or not it is physical. It has to do with whether it gives pleasure to your mind. Yes I find rules beautiful. The mechanics in Super Mario 64 are beautiful. DMC4 has beautiful mechanics. Not even talking about art style just the mechanics themselves.

The meaning of art has changed over time

Nu-art is mostly about expressionism, and it can encompass quite literally anything you can think of.

Where originally a set number of things would be considered art, and the individual beauty of this art was considered subjective; nu-art has the tendency to have people claim it isn't art at all, rather than saying it is art which they don't like

Therefore the meaning of art is now subjective

Yes, beauty. Not aesthetic.
Next time use the right term from the get-go so we can avoid this conversation.

I actually just butted into your conversation, sorry about that.

Intricate rules are empowering, not beautiful. They are human as far as they put more beauty under your influence and domination.

If you try to conceive of a beauty that isn't "surface" or superficial, I think you're walking too far away from your own humanity.

>Nu-art
Stopped reading right there. Learn to express your thoughts (however shit and worthless they may be) like a proper human being.

Aesthetic is literally "concerning the appreciation of beauty" I did not misuse it.

>I'm a shallow bitch
See, four words
You didn't need three lines to say that

>h-how dare you use phrases which trigger me!
Reddit's down the hall and to the right, pal

>The mechanics in Super Mario 64 are beautiful.

If Mario was a white rectangle and the world was just a bunch of simple shapes plastered with random textures, the mechanics would still be beautiful? You're stretching this word too far.

If you want to say they are elegant and complex, sure, but they don't posess beauty in themselves (unless we're talking about "aspie-beauty", which isn't beauty at all), just an exciting relation to beauty. In fact, when we talk about "game mechanics", we're basically talking about how appearances in a game transform. Take away the games profound appearance and you're just talking about something that is basically inert on its own.

What I don't understand here is what goes between Physics and Math. Physics is just applied math, right? Since the only things making up physics is observed phenomena like "thing is moving" and math. So if anything, should the mathematician be right up next to the physicist and someone called "observer" be on the far right?

>triggered
Here it goes again. Nobody is upset. I'm just telling you you're such a pathetic shit you've forgotten how real people speak. You've let this place turn you into an absolute subhuman at this point, and I'm not talking about it in a "hahah, us 4channers, eh" way.

I laughed. Brilliant user, why don't you explain how beauty can show up as something other than an appearance?

artists always have needed patrons to live, user

>you used a word I don't like therefore I was unable to read the rest of your statement
>I'm not triggered t-though
Yea sure, whatever bud

Math isnt about equations, lol. Math is about piecing together puzzles using two basic ideas: sets and logic.

I dont understand what the other user is trying to say on claiming math is the universe, but i think mathematics is the human interpretation of the language of the universe.

Unfortunately mathematics has become absolutelu butchered in not just north america, but around the world. 99.99999% of people have never done mathematics, including physists and chemists unfortunately (not trying to belittle these fields)

In pphysics you can get away with the phrase "for all practical purposes".

Poetry?
Literature in general?

Not all beauty is skin-deep user.

So is it called something different when it's not "for all practical purposes" or is that just physics with stricter rules?

>someone states something isn't art
>people start trying to define what is / isn't art
>no one can come to a consensus
>this happens every art thread everywhere

Why do people care about specifying art when it's such a meaningless definition itself?

Ultimately its a game, just because a soccer player has a cool graphic T on doesn't mean its art

You can break down anything till you are left with science and math you dumb faggot.
Also humanities like philosophy are also considered part of the sciences if you like it or not :^)

Because arguing over things is fun
Also I have nothing better to do

Poetry and literature are appearances, but they're shackled to language. You decode the language to tap into the appearance, which is different from looking at a painting.

I'm still wondering what this beyond-skin-deep beauty is like. Would an aspie be able to tell me? Should I line my brain with eyes?

I think the mechanics/rules themselves are beautiful. You can call me an aspie but that won't change my mind.

GO ON HOME BRITISH SOLDIERS GO ON HOME
HAVE YOU GOT NO FOCKIN' HOMES OF YOUR OWN

>eyes are the only senses that can be beautiful
I guess music can never be beautiful.

Math is simply broader and non-specific. For example, math will tell you that vectors are elements of a set over a certain field satisfying several axioms. Physics will tell you that vectors are arrows. Which is true in the same way "apples are fruit" is true, but it doesn't convey everything and only describes the part that's relevant at the moment.

Not only did you misunderstand my Bloodborne reference, you think eyes themselves are 'senses'.

Think in terms of sensory surfaces. A surface still tells a story and still telegraphs the churning unpredictable depths of life. Entire realities seem to exist in songs, and it's from our ancestors having to become conscious of their reality through the smallest sounds/superficialities (or die).

Factually, art is anything that you can bring yourself to call art. By that, anything can be art, not everything is per se, it just can be.

It's the only definition that really covers whatever we've been calling art since the concept came to be. You may have you own opinion about what's really art. And that's okay. Words have the meaning you want them to have, this applies for all the words in any language.

But if we want to reach an agreement in what's art, this could be the only definition that covers all the different opinions in the subject.

>bloodborne reference
Sorry I'm white

That's just a bunch of pretentious nonsense to justify why you think games aren't art but all your favorite bullshit is.

I think games are the best art, so I have no idea where you even got that idea from, faggot user. Time to close your browser.

BB is one of the whitest games there is. The whole game is basically "plight of the highly-maginative whites".

meant to write
>highly-imaginative

Hello?

>Factually, art is anything that you can bring yourself to call art. By that, anything can be art, not everything is per se, it just can be.

Art is all about resemblance. Art that is particularly enjoyable is art that manages to transcend itself by appearing like so much more (by resembling something without actually being it, i.e. pornographic photos still give you a boner). You can't be like "this is just a painting", you have to let its raw, unmediated appearance hit you at gut level or it's lost on you. This really underscores why art can create so many different impressions in so many different people.

This essential resemblance is why you can call so many things "art". If you were driving home and saw a line of trees that were really suggestive and created a big feel in you, it was probably because of that "transcendent resemblance" I just mentioned. It wouldn't be far off to say that it was "like an art piece", whether it had a singular creator or not.

But yeah, I would avoid the "art is anything you call art" circularity, it doesn't actually explain anything.

I still think you are bullshitting a little. Beauty is whatever gives your mind pleasure that's it. This can come from within or outside through your senses.

Vidya isnt art, nor is it to be judged like its film or a painting. This is how you can tell the medium is still infantile, because the critics don't actually know what they are taking about and try to project and emulate other critics of other mediums in order to appear valid.

Chess, checkers, go, etc are not art, and neither are video games. Eventually we will get over this era of trying to force certain scenes in games as "kino" but I have no clue when we will.

>Art is all about resemblance.
>Art that is particularly enjoyable is art that manages to transcend itself by appearing like so much more
>But yeah, I would avoid the "art is anything you call art" circularity, it doesn't actually explain anything.
I agree with your definition. I was simply giving the most simplified definition I could think of.

Anyone can find resemblance or deeper meaning in anything. Even abstract ideas, like a few words coupled together. By that art is essentially anything that you think you call art, because you find meaning in it, something other than what itself really is. But yeah, I get what you're trying to say. I agree.

>that you think you can* call art

Except Chess literally is art you fag.

The entirety of the graphic design industry says otherwise

Should've said something that isn't made in a factory by the chinese

No its not. It's also not a sport.

It's a incredibly beautiful game so therefore it is art. Checkmate.

*castles from checkmate* Heh...you fell for my diversion...

why is it important to call videogames art?

hell, why is important to call anything art?

does it increase its value?

does it make it more profitable?

does it make it better?

does it make it more interesting?

If you need something to be called art just so you can appreciate it more, then you are not asking for art but for self confirmation.