Timestamps:00:28: Art as an Accessibility Tool: Coping, feeling feelings01:45: Philosophy&apos;s History: Hyper-rationalism. Ability to form conscious propositional thought02:45: Art isn&apos;t Always Rational: A tool that can be used and misused04:28: We&apos;re Complicated: Maze of feelings, dead-ends and exits05:47: Art & Irrationality: What moves us? Maybe not documentaries. 06:15: Parasite & Capitalism: Condemning capitalism. Connection to MarxSupport the show (https://www.patreon.com/talkpopc)

TalkPOPc's Podcast

Episode 61: Jay Ortiz Bryant Park

Timestamps:00:19: Defining Art as Cognition: We&apos;re still arguing about what Art and Cognition mean03:15: Duchamp & What art can be: The social world and interconnectivity.04:15: Art is High Cognition: Cognition in the process of crafting.05:55: Modern Art, Michael Fried: Paintings don&apos;t care about you. The enclosed world in self-contained art.09:15: Art as a Crystallized Moment: Incomprehensibly complex network of social relationships that can form meaning11:25: Kant, Genius: Generative power to create a perfect fit. Bach isn&apos;t just random sound. Is genius capacity the end of the line?13:20: Identical Twins: Vastly different complexities of relationships. Beyond the pale.14:35: The Role of the Artist: Relationships between viewer and artist. 17:00: Camp, Susan Sontag and Time: Bad horror movies of the 80s. Our chronological distance allows us to experience them as camp.Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/talkpopc)

Episode #60: Complex Systems & The Social Construction of Meaning in Art: Ben Porter with Resident Philosopher Whittaker @ Bryant Park

Timestamps:00:20: First Impressions of Art as Cognition01:00: Art is an expression of the mind. Expressing the self02:08: Expressionists: Showing the world through painting. Why should I show you what things look like? Shouldn&apos;t I make a statement about me instead?04:05: A Move towards Existentialism: What is on the inside vs outside. 05:05: Descartes, Kant and the Exterior World: Does the world exist? How do we know? God or reason?06:45: Postmodern Times: The willingness to experiment and Billie Eilish as an Expressionist. 08:35: Art vs Language: Experimental power and how art differs. Art is able to reach people deeper.Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/talkpopc)

Episode #59: Expression in Art, Hegel & Billie Eilish: Sebastian speaks with Philosopher Nicholas Whittaker

Timestamps:00:35: Elaine and Nicholas tackle the definition of Art as Cognition via first impressions. "Your immediate impulse in response to a blank page, without thinking."01:30: We&apos;re in a virtual world, but we still make motions perpetually all in the idea of virtual cognition03:19: Aesthetic Cognition almost implies a design of inherited gestures and movements that were already instructed. 05:05: The standard definition of cognition: Brain activity07:00: Art as Cognition applies to embodied artistic movements. Unconscious, immediate, gut participations in art. 08:50: A right to aesthetic cognition. Abusing privilege. We don&apos;t talk about animals in aesthetic cognition. We talk about it on the base of human behavior11:45: Inherently human focus on art. Human beings have the power of reason, or at least that&apos;s what we&apos;ve historically stressed. But hang on...13:00: When we limit cognition, we limit the idea that animals can feel. Richly felt experiences. They feel fear, hunger, joy, so why don&apos;t we give those feelings due credit?Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/talkpopc)

Episode #58: Cognition, Humans, Animals, and Art: Participant Elaine Angelopoulos with Resident Philosopher Nicholas Whittaker @Bryant Park

Jacob, a pre-med student, talks about how visual gist (in the first 300 ms) is something similar to an interpersonal immediate impression - how we like something or want something or we are repelled by it.  The brain has to filter out information, Jacob notes, and so evolution has allowed us to do that. He also wants to tie this to moral revulsion and brings in Jonathan Haidt&apos;s writings on the problems of people with damage to the ventral medial prefrontal cortex, who seem to have no sense of revulsion to the most basic things, like "bashing in your mother&apos;s head". There is no barrier around right or wrong. Shottenkirk points out that yes, our brain has to edit, and in those brain damage cases it points to what parts are not there. Jacob then refers to a book by Shottenkirk&apos;s (Perception, Cognition, and Aesthetics), and her writings on gist. He notes an additional point: the fragmentation of the mind is seen in the basic biology of cone (color) cells and rod cells (black and white) - where the periphery of our vision is black and white, and the color is the centralized and foveated part of the retina.  We are not conscious that the periphery is black and white. The conversation then builds on the distinction between knowing something consciously and unconsciously, and shifts to the process of naming - we name things we are concerned about owning, or things we fear and want to avoid. But there are things that are not named; we edit out reality and many things we don&apos;t name. Jacob agrees that much of that editing is socially constructed, and further argues that we need to see things as others see the world, and to perceive things in different ways.  important thing is talking to one another. Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/talkpopc)

Episode #57: Gist, Art, and Personal Interactions: Resident Philosopher Shottenkirk speaks with student Jacob Sabu

In a rich and complex conversation, John Palmer, a software engineer and recently influenced by James Gibson&apos;s writing, discusses virtual worlds in game design and computer environments. Shottenkirk, who has noted that this relies on perception and thus is right up the alley of issues of art and cognition, listens as John discusses the important notion of affordances, a term coined by Gibson in the 50s. They exchange thoughts back and forth about the differences between affordances and symbols: symbols refer to objects, but affordances, such as in John&apos;s example of a virtual reality experience of sitting in a chair, rely on one&apos;s subjective experience. This distinction, Shottenkirk points out, parallels the differences in memory systems: there is conscious, semantic memory found in the midline diecephalon (I know the word for "glasses"), and procedural memory - how we move around, etc. Think also of objective and subjective experiences. But affordances, Shottenkirk argues, must rely on procedural memories, and not just symbol /semantics. John agrees, and brings in the notion of low-level features in aesthetic experience and Gibson&apos;s discussion about the inter-dependent notions of "animal" and "environment" - animals exist only in environments, and environments can only exist in relation to the animals in them. John&apos;s main interest is the emotional feel that one has in games - for instance the frantic feeling of being trapped by two ghosts in pac-man - and how profoundly we can identify with the character, which John argues comes from having a body in the game: The virtual body becomes an extension of your own body. Shottenkirk adds that again it is procedural memory that is allowing this to happen.  John adds that the visual and audio feedback on a screen can make someone feel like "I" am moving in this game. The body, and how we identify with it, and how we related to one another with our bodies is discussed, with John contrasting the communicative abilities that come with in-person interactions and the impossibility of having similar interactions over zoom. Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/talkpopc)

Episode #56 Software Design, Bodies, Virtual Reality and Affordances: John Palmer talks with talkPOPc Resident Philosopher Shottenkirk

Nicholas starts the conversation by saying that he has recently experienced a renewed interest in making art himself, which he hadn&apos;t done since a child. He is also a regular meditator, and argues that art "is one of the best forms of meditation."  As someone who is in the film industry,  he says (& RP Flores agrees) that David Lynch is a great filmmaker,  with Nicholas pointing out that Lynch also a meditator.  They agree that the mediation practice is evident in Lynch&apos;s films. How does meditation then relate to filmmaking and to art in general?Film is a more powerful art form to Nicholas because of the added dimensions of sound, motion, story, visual, etc. - what Flores calls "the experience of flow".  The person who makes the art, Flores argues, must access this part of the cognitive process.  She turns the conversation and asks Nicholas about what happens in the role of audience member, and he answers by talking about a recent inspirational visit to a gallery  on 29th street in Chelsea, NYC, but he also says that aesthetic inspiration can come from anywhere including the trees right in front of them: "Appreciation, being grateful, being thankful" plays an essential part. Flores then sums up the conversation by encapsulating his underlying philosophical point: "You can be properly inspired by the world because you are approaching it with this open-minded and open-eyed perspective and then that allows you to take it all in and your cognitive engines can crank out, and then in turn you can produce something of genuine value because it&apos;s bringing in this attentive, focused perspective on the world."Nicholas agrees: "Being thankful. Focus on the present."    Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/talkpopc)

Episode #55 Meditation, Art, & Cognition: Resident Philosopher Carolina Flores talks with talkPOPc participant Nicholas Ligotino

RP Shottenkirk and participant Nicola Johnson discuss fashion: what makes it good or bad, and why we care. "It goes back to the mind" Nicola says at the beginning of the conversation and she expounds on that point in several different ways. "It tells something about me - my financial status, my taste, my social status. " Shottenkirk notes that Nicola&apos;s shoes are amazing, well-designed boots, and points out that the designer expressed themselves and you as the wearer take on the designer&apos;s vision. Nicola partially agrees but states, "I go with the designer about 60% but then I add 40% of myself. " As someone who has made fashion, Nicola argues that everyone - people with money and people without - both know when something is good. "Art attracts you whether you can afford it or not."   Shottenkirk then asks: What are the traits that make something good? Nicola answers that there are three things: "Detail, quality in material, and organization of your thoughts."  In describing why detail is important, she explains - speaking from the point of view of the buyer - "They want to see that you&apos;ve cared, and when you&apos;ve cared they feel worthy."  In other words, "They want to pay for mind...What you&apos;re looking at is somebody else&apos;s mind." She summarizes by stating the conclusion: you&apos;re not buying a thing you are buying a part of the mind of the person behind the clothing.Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/talkpopc)

Episode 54: Fashion: "Buying a piece of clothing is buying someone's mind", Resident Philosopher Shottenkirk with talkPOPc participant Nicola Johnson

talkPOPc participant Mark Friedman begins the conversation with  Resident Philosopher Carolina Flores by talking about the Italian Renaissance, in particular the Ghiberti doors n Florence, which is where he spent his study-abroad year as a college student. Flores points out that when you see something in person and study it in person it is so different than seeing it also; noting that perhaps it&apos;s that one is paying attention to the thing in a different way, and thus understanding it better as you&apos;ve also added in the cultural context. He then transition to Duchamp&apos;s "Urinal," and readymades, and states that sometimes you see art hanging on a museum wall and wonder "really, that??" intimating that you can be puzzled but then move beyond that. Flores sums up the conversation by addressing issues of attention/focus, and the process of learning about things, and asks Mark if art can really expand one&apos;s perspective.  He responds that film can obviously do that, but music can do that, too. Flores discusses how music encompasses certain attitudes to the world, similarly to Duchamp&apos;s fuck-you gesture. Mark agrees and uses the example of punk, or that disco vibe of everything&apos;s-all-right. So, he asks, has a piece of music literally changed the way one thinks?Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/talkpopc)

Episode 53: Attention, Education, and "Can art change your attitude to the world?" Resident Philosopher with talkPOPc participant Mark Friedman

Ian Olasov begins the conversation with the point that philosophy can play a role in how we get out of the pandemic by building community.  Alex  brings in the problematic issue of mask-wearing, and how though he has self-identified as "not that courteous or respectful of others" he does see the general case for masks at least indoor.  The conversation ranges widely and wildly, with Alex asking Resident Philosopher Olasov if Seneca was the basis for the Bible.  Olasov notes that the Bible is complex  with even varying definitions of God, and while he also admits he is not an expert in the Stoics, he asks Alex why he is thinking that, but preliminarily states that the Bible, like the Stoics, argue that acting out of control is being emotionally out of control.  They agree that the notion of what is emotionally inappropriate does correspond to inappropriate behavior.  The conversation then jumps to Alex recounting an experience with a Japanese artist who is known for eating people, and  the bizarreness of some art and the unforgettableness of that art, for better or worse.  RP Olasov summarizes beautifully: "Art is getting you to see things from other&apos;s point of view".Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/talkpopc)

Episode 52: The Stoics, the Bible, Artists, Eating People, NFT's, and Your First Period: talkPOPc Resident Philosopher Olasov speaks to talkPOPc Participant Alex

Resident Philosopher Ian Olasov and talkPOPc Participant Eva Pilay discuss how art and philosophy can both allow people to re-emerge from the pandemic, allowing people to be united and socialized: objects of shared attention. But Eva points out that propaganda does the same thing; Olasov agrees and then says if it&apos;s attention to something good then it&apos;s good socializing but not so much is fascist propaganda! Sometimes, he points out, people are fans of someone just as a short-cut for communication, like saying that "I&apos;m a fan of Drake", and then that is a pretext for conversation. They agree that Drake has cool street style, an emotional style - his displayed feelings of vulnerability - and that people agree on that. They then switch into a discussion of how much music unites us, and how often people listen to music from other cultures. Olasov discusses friends of his who live in Trinidad, and the fact that they listen to music from Venezuela, and how that overlays the political issues of migration of people fleeing the chaos of Venezuela and the xenophobia that rears its head with any refugee situation. The last part of the conversation switches to issues of cognition, with RP Olasov wondering how different art media do philosophy - whether it&apos;s just "solving the problem" of previous styles or in some other way. Philosophy is often about redefining terms, and art really often does the same thing.Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/talkpopc)

Episode 51: Music - Socializing, and Thinking: talkPOPc Resident Philosopher Ian Olasov & talkPOPc Guest Participant Eva Pilay on Art as Cognition

In answer to Flores&apos; question, "What&apos;s the latest art piece that spoke to you?" Botti answers Robert Altman&apos;s Three Women, which is about conveying emotions instead of telling a story. Flores asks if movies can express pure emotion as well as music? Botti answers that movies rely so much on music, pictures, etc., that are borrowed from other art forms, and it brings up the question whether the movie creates that emotion or is it just a conglomerate from other sources? This question elicits Flores&apos; (smiling) response: can the movie be expressing something over and above the components of the movie? to which Botti makes the metaphysical joke that the "whole is the same thing as the parts", but then explains more seriously that it would either be that the music, the images, the text, are parts of the movie or that they are general sources on which the movie is going to be grounded, but not related as parts to the whole. But Flores points out that the meaning of an image depends on the context of the other images around it. The conversation then introduces the contrast with novels, and they discuss the difference in narratives usage in a film versus a novel, agreeing that the camera forces a perspective on the viewer,  with Flores stating that movies can force us "into complicity with perspectives we don&apos;t want to take", and then asks Botti if that is really different from novels? After some discussion they agree  that first-person narration in novels gives the "inner chatter" version of subjectivity, whereas movies give subjectivity through "a take on the outer world". Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/talkpopc)

Episode 50: Mereology, Subjectivity, and Movies & Novels: talkPOPc Resident Philosophers Carolina Flores & Martina Botti discuss Art as Cognition

Nayanci Lopez, who hosts the philosophy/comedy podcast "But Why Not? A philosophy themed comedy podcast!" discusses with RP Olasov why we make art - do we do it for a purpose or is it just something that we have to do?  If it&apos;s about beauty that&apos;s a bit of a problem because our notion of beauty changes over time. They agreed that although our notions of concepts are built over time in our lives, and you gradually acquire the ability to use the words, different languages do use their word for "beautiful" differently. Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/talkpopc)

Episode 49: Resident Philosopher Ian Olasov and talkPOPc Guest Participant Nayanci Lopez "Why Do We Make Art?"

Resident Philosopher Ian Olasov makes the point that even though the usual media you use to do philosophy - writing journal articles, etc., could be extended and one could also do philosophy through sculpture or other media. Joshua thinks of Picasso&apos;s Guernica and the reference to war - "what man can do to man". But also when we talk about "art" the term becomes expansive, but he thinks that photography can most easily be philosophical; it&apos;s trying to capture the zeitgeist of a moment. Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/talkpopc)

Episode 48: talkPOPc Resident Philosopher Ian Olasov & talkPOPc Guest Participant Joshua Rosenberg converse about art as a medium for philosophy and vice versa, using Picasso's Guernica as an example and how the medium of photography can be philosophical

Shannon starts with the belief that everyone is creative and able to make art in some kind of way, which she discovered when she first took a drawing and painting class in high school. Her new desire is to act, but feels apprehensive about it because, in RP Flores&apos; words "you&apos;re on the line".  They discuss the difficulties of performance and the line between one&apos;s art and what one is doing - and one&apos;s self.  They agree that making art though always opens one to not just different perspectives of life, but by forcing oneself to focus it also allows one to know life and to be expressive. Shannon states that conversations too are a form of art. They finish by discussing the differences between philosophy and art - whereas philosophy is trying to make true statements about the world, with both philosophy and art you have a vague idea of where you&apos;re going when you start a piece but the real idea emerges much later on. Shannon points out that art depends on trust in yourself; "art is a verb not a noun". Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/talkpopc)

Episode 47: "Art is Verb Not a Noun": Resident Philosopher Carolina Flores talks with talkPOPc participant Shannon Rousseau

talkPOPc stands for Philosophers' Ontological Party club. It is a non-profit that was founded by Dena Shottenkirk, who is both a philosopher and an artist. It sponsors one-to-one conversations with a philosopher. The philosopher wears this amazing gold African king hat! Various philosophers participate and it happens in various places. For example, we go into bars and have one-to-one conversations. Various bars, both dives and fancy. We go to Grand Central Station in New York City. We go to the sidewalk outside City Hall in Philly. We go into bodegas all over Brooklyn. We sit down next to the deli counter and hold a conversation with someone who has walked in to get a ham sandwich and walked out knowing so much more about their own thoughts. We go into city parks and set up the talkPOPc's tent. We listen. Here are some of the conversations.

hubhopper

TalkPOPc's Podcast

hubhopper