/lit/ - Literature

>>7952409
my father's dead, so if he raises himself, it'll be a miracle

>>7113782
okay, i'll bite
>P1
"hackiness": what does that mean? does it mean not creative? not original? also, this premise precludes the importance of intention behind an artist's work, judging solely based on subjective interpretation

>P2
are you suggesting that there exists an objective aesthetic standard, and that if there is, you have complete knowledge of it? by all means, share with the class

for instance, in your picture, there are trillions of microbes that remain invisible to the naked eye. do you deny that their invisible dance is worthy of appreciation, or can you not contemplate this at all?

>P3
perfection by what standard? the root of the word is facio, to make, and per-, thorougly. etymologically, perfection = completion, in that you can't add more. god's perfection, by this definition, has no relationship to creation, only to the innate quality of god itself (unless you're conceding that god is creation, which from the artist/hack parallel, you aren't)

>tl;dr try taking logic 102, maybe you'll learn modality