difference between art appreciation and agenda driving

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:when one first encounters an art and wishes to discover more, one finds out what appeals to one's own senses about it. then one tries to find out the various aesthetic elements that defines the art and how they relate to each other, and how they relate to other forms of art with which one is familiar. this process is called art appreciation.

in another process one tries to find out what about the art form fits in with one's own worldview, and collects every possible piece of information about the art which can then be used to first convince oneself of the essential correctness of one's worldview, twist and contort pieces that don't fit, and then relentlessly foist the resulting product on others. this process is known as agenda driving Narcissism.

panini press wrote:The challenge of the agenda driver is to do it in an intelligent, not-so-obvious manner, so that the agenda is actually advanced as a result of the driver's efforts. The relentless foisting you allude to, combined with the characteristically desperate clutching at straws, unfortunately make it all too obvious to the audience. Once the agenda is transparent, the agenda driver's efforts just become pathetic and comical at the same time*, and those efforts become counter-productive to the agenda.

I am now rather familiar with the methods and tactics of two different agenda drivers. Both use the broad process you described above, with their own quirks (which, for convenience, I named for their handles). I can say confidently that both of them hurt, rather than help, in the advancement of their favorite agendas, and that is almost entirely due to their methods.

* Ref: butt-head synthesis

Rashmun wrote:

panini press wrote:The challenge of the agenda driver is to do it in an intelligent, not-so-obvious manner, so that the agenda is actually advanced as a result of the driver's efforts. The relentless foisting you allude to, combined with the characteristically desperate clutching at straws, unfortunately make it all too obvious to the audience. Once the agenda is transparent, the agenda driver's efforts just become pathetic and comical at the same time*, and those efforts become counter-productive to the agenda.

I am now rather familiar with the methods and tactics of two different agenda drivers. Both use the broad process you described above, with their own quirks (which, for convenience, I named for their handles). I can say confidently that both of them hurt, rather than help, in the advancement of their favorite agendas, and that is almost entirely due to their methods.

* Ref: butt-head synthesis

One wonders when the Pee Peeing and Poo Pooing of PP will stop. Will he keep his promise of not wanting to interact with me?

garam_kuta wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

panini press wrote:The challenge of the agenda driver is to do it in an intelligent, not-so-obvious manner, so that the agenda is actually advanced as a result of the driver's efforts. The relentless foisting you allude to, combined with the characteristically desperate clutching at straws, unfortunately make it all too obvious to the audience. Once the agenda is transparent, the agenda driver's efforts just become pathetic and comical at the same time*, and those efforts become counter-productive to the agenda.

I am now rather familiar with the methods and tactics of two different agenda drivers. Both use the broad process you described above, with their own quirks (which, for convenience, I named for their handles). I can say confidently that both of them hurt, rather than help, in the advancement of their favorite agendas, and that is almost entirely due to their methods.

* Ref: butt-head synthesis

One wonders when the Pee Peeing and Poo Pooing of PP will stop. Will he keep his promise of not wanting to interact with me?

please do not suggest this as a BN item for Beijing performance

atcg wrote:Max, you have laid out fairly clearly what was in most people's minds about art appreciation and agenda driving. The real question is what does one do about it - the agenda driver is not going for foisting their worldviews on others - that is, as they recognize, a lofty goal. It is just enough for them to be able to air their contorted logic in a manner that is in-your-face. It suffices when the posts get responded to, discussed at length, and disproven time and again. That merely fuels the engine of the agenda-driver to keep at it.

Agenda-driving also has the aim of splitting, hair-splitting differences and creating an environment of mutually assured dissent. It is far from a search for truth or any noble intent. The best possible response is to ignore the agenda-driver.

Rashmun wrote:

atcg wrote:Max, you have laid out fairly clearly what was in most people's minds about art appreciation and agenda driving. The real question is what does one do about it - the agenda driver is not going for foisting their worldviews on others - that is, as they recognize, a lofty goal. It is just enough for them to be able to air their contorted logic in a manner that is in-your-face. It suffices when the posts get responded to, discussed at length, and disproven time and again. That merely fuels the engine of the agenda-driver to keep at it.

Agenda-driving also has the aim of splitting, hair-splitting differences and creating an environment of mutually assured dissent. It is far from a search for truth or any noble intent. The best possible response is to ignore the agenda-driver.

ignoring all views opposed to or different from your view would result in dogmatism. Embracing dogmatism would result in people like atcg become pinheads.

atcg wrote:Max, you have laid out fairly clearly what was in most people's minds about art appreciation and agenda driving. The real question is what does one do about it - the agenda driver is not going for foisting their worldviews on others - that is, as they recognize, a lofty goal. It is just enough for them to be able to air their contorted logic in a manner that is in-your-face. It suffices when the posts get responded to, discussed at length, and disproven time and again. That merely fuels the engine of the agenda-driver to keep at it.

Agenda-driving also has the aim of splitting, hair-splitting differences and creating an environment of mutually assured dissent. It is far from a search for truth or any noble intent. The best possible response is to ignore the agenda-driver.

panini press wrote:

atcg wrote:Max, you have laid out fairly clearly what was in most people's minds about art appreciation and agenda driving. The real question is what does one do about it - the agenda driver is not going for foisting their worldviews on others - that is, as they recognize, a lofty goal. It is just enough for them to be able to air their contorted logic in a manner that is in-your-face. It suffices when the posts get responded to, discussed at length, and disproven time and again. That merely fuels the engine of the agenda-driver to keep at it.

Agenda-driving also has the aim of splitting, hair-splitting differences and creating an environment of mutually assured dissent. It is far from a search for truth or any noble intent. The best possible response is to ignore the agenda-driver.

+1. It is difficult for me to practice this (and I can see that you practice it well), but I do agree with the wisdom of this view.

atcg wrote:Max, you have laid out fairly clearly what was in most people's minds about art appreciation and agenda driving. The real question is what does one do about it - the agenda driver is not going for foisting their worldviews on others - that is, as they recognize, a lofty goal. It is just enough for them to be able to air their contorted logic in a manner that is in-your-face. It suffices when the posts get responded to, discussed at length, and disproven time and again. That merely fuels the engine of the agenda-driver to keep at it.

Agenda-driving also has the aim of splitting, hair-splitting differences and creating an environment of mutually assured dissent. It is far from a search for truth or any noble intent. The best possible response is to ignore the agenda-driver.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

yes i know. serenity now. serenity now...