MURF
Apparently I'm going to be delivering a lecture at the state capitol. Its some big intercollegiate conference thing, and I'm one of the only people from U of M Flint that's going.
Academic extra-curriculars? Opportunities for networking? Me? Seriously?
Man, this is weird.
Anyways, here's the abstract I submitted, just to tease you with my lecture's goodness:
I’ve always seen philosophy as the meeting point of the empirical sciences and art. It is the place where creative thought is utilized to explain the world, and I’ve long enjoyed following philosophical threads of thought through thickets of scientific investigation, as well as shadowing the subject as it leans to the left and combines with the expressiveness of art. When I am investigating a piece of art, I’ll make note of the philosophies and sciences prevalent in that time and this can often be used to divulge an artist’s meaning. So consistently has this seemed to apply to art that has not been commissioned that it’s become almost a mechanical process to interpret.
I chose to critique the photography of Lucas Samaras because of the bizarre forms and themes the artist utilizes. To accomplish this critique, I had to be sufficiently well-versed in the era to which his work contributed. The philosophical undertones he utilizes seem to be fairly definite, while not direct, and I’m certain my speculation and research have made for a fair representation.
I think I'll be presenting sometime in March, but I'm probably wrong. I never have paid much attention to deadlines.
Academic extra-curriculars? Opportunities for networking? Me? Seriously?
Man, this is weird.
Anyways, here's the abstract I submitted, just to tease you with my lecture's goodness:
I’ve always seen philosophy as the meeting point of the empirical sciences and art. It is the place where creative thought is utilized to explain the world, and I’ve long enjoyed following philosophical threads of thought through thickets of scientific investigation, as well as shadowing the subject as it leans to the left and combines with the expressiveness of art. When I am investigating a piece of art, I’ll make note of the philosophies and sciences prevalent in that time and this can often be used to divulge an artist’s meaning. So consistently has this seemed to apply to art that has not been commissioned that it’s become almost a mechanical process to interpret.
I chose to critique the photography of Lucas Samaras because of the bizarre forms and themes the artist utilizes. To accomplish this critique, I had to be sufficiently well-versed in the era to which his work contributed. The philosophical undertones he utilizes seem to be fairly definite, while not direct, and I’m certain my speculation and research have made for a fair representation.
I think I'll be presenting sometime in March, but I'm probably wrong. I never have paid much attention to deadlines.