What we’re about
The Singapore Philosophy Group meets to discuss life and it's fundamental questions. These gatherings are informal; we enjoy banter as much as debate.
All are welcome and we hope that you will join us in our enquiries.
As Socrates said, The unexamined life is not worth living.
Upcoming events (1)
See all- Drawing from the deepDongqu Sanren, Singapore
ANNOUNCEMENT: For this particular event, the owner of Dong Qu has kindly agreed to host us. Do buy a drink or two as a token of appreciation!
Venue: 2nd floor (take lift) https://maps.app.goo.gl/Dwd4XAi9LbGNG2D26
When one thinks of “art”, one often readily imagines renaissance art. The Mona Lisa, or Michael Angelo’s sculpture of David; something that you’d see in a museum or gallery. This paints a picture of art as something rarified and expressed in a small part of life. We do it for fun when we have spare time or money, and it’s stereotyped as “sophisticated” to “appreciate art”.
But an alternative view sees art more broadly. Consider that:
- As of 2024, Taylor Swift is worth almost $2 billion, with music as her main source of income.
- In 2020, George Floyd’s face was repainted across America; a rallying symbol for racial equality.
- The Sagrada Familia church has been under construction since 1852. Gaudi designed it expecting its construction to take about 300 years.
These productions reach beyond art galleries and, in aggregate, reflect an enormous investment of time, attention, brain power, money, and resources from both artist and audience.
This raises a few questions:
- Why do we do this? And why are we willing to spend such time and resources on it?
- What exactly are we “doing”?
- And in the first place, do these count as “art”? More generally, what counts as “art”?
Art sometimes seems, on first glance, like an indulgence. If so, this makes the scale of the above examples curious: given the practical stresses we’re under, why do we seem to “waste” so much time on these frivolous things? Why did humanity not organize more practically: as a hyper optimized productive society, efficiently solving one practical problem after another?
Perhaps we should focus on art that has functional utility. But an opposing view proclaims that “art should be for art’s sake” (focused on self-expression and aesthetics, not external purpose). Which position resonates with you? What should we teach in schools?
Whatever the purpose of art and art education, a deeper observation remains:
Before there was canvas and paint, there were vases, stone statues, and shell engravings. 3000 years ago, there were Petroglyphs. 10,000 years ago, The Great Sphynx. 50,000 years ago, the Lion man figurine. Each of these display delicate intent, design, and craftsmanship, clearly effortful, yet “unnecessary” for practical function. And so it seems these works go back to the dawn of humanity, ranging from small to staggering.
What is it, so deep in us, that compels the production and consumption of cultural works across the millenia? And when AI generates art, will it displace us with its superior skill and speed? Is it doing the same things that humans are doing? Or is there something deeper, more human, more imperfect to our creations?
Works of art: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1I4qCIBLUX5TNytep_8PMPbFdjFUOqCzt?usp=sharing
