I'll elaborate my opinion here:
Art is not a well defined field. Everything can be considered art, It is so subjective that It is almost entirely dependant on your angle of approach.
From a logical perspective, there is no logical reason to counterpose logic-related(objetive) vs art-related(subjective). They are 2 different angles of approach and not necessarily contradicting or opposed to each other(but could be). From a logical perspective everything is logic related and built. The art itself is a logical thing. Logically speaking its an expected combination of errors or any kind or deviation of a standarized perspective, taking a scientific reference point. I allow myself making the assumption that any kind of deviation is expected in any complex system that is evolving. "Art" could just be considered a fancy word for It, giving value to certain kind of deviation that may trigger emotions (dopamine release) in a part of a brain and marketing It like a subjective beauty, with a meaning..and calling It 'art'
From a completely artístic point of view(which is imposible, because everything including the words and language form of expression is logically designed so its just not possible to separate logic from art bc art itself is described by logic with logic-made tools in a world sustained by logic ): art is kind of chaos (and chaos is another fancy word in the definition of entropy(a scientific term)) .I definetely could be wrong, so this description is art. I am art. Everything is art
If everything is art, nothing is art. If art is everywhere, it is not special. Art is not chaos. Art produces or reaffirms meaning for those who interact with it. Logic may or may not have anything to do with it.
If everything is art, and nothing is art, does that mean everything is nothing?
I'll elaborate my opinion here:
Art is not a well defined field. Everything can be considered art, It is so subjective that It is almost entirely dependant on your angle of approach.
From a logical perspective, there is no logical reason to counterpose logic-related(objetive) vs art-related(subjective). They are 2 different angles of approach and not necessarily contradicting or opposed to each other(but could be). From a logical perspective everything is logic related and built. The art itself is a logical thing. Logically speaking its an expected combination of errors or any kind or deviation of a standarized perspective, taking a scientific reference point. I allow myself making the assumption that any kind of deviation is expected in any complex system that is evolving. "Art" could just be considered a fancy word for It, giving value to certain kind of deviation that may trigger emotions (dopamine release) in a part of a brain and marketing It like a subjective beauty, with a meaning..and calling It 'art'
From a completely artístic point of view(which is imposible, because everything including the words and language form of expression is logically designed so its just not possible to separate logic from art bc art itself is described by logic with logic-made tools in a world sustained by logic ): art is kind of chaos (and chaos is another fancy word in the definition of entropy(a scientific term)) .I definetely could be wrong, so this description is art. I am art. Everything is art
If everything is art, nothing is art. If art is everywhere, it is not special. Art is not chaos. Art produces or reaffirms meaning for those who interact with it. Logic may or may not have anything to do with it.