More Heat Than Light is a history of how physics has drawn some inspiration from economics and also how economics has sought to emulate physics, especially with regard to the theory of value. It traces the development of the energy concept in Western physics and its subsequent effect upon the invention and promulgation of neoclassical economics. Any discussion of the standing of economics as a science must include the historical symbiosis between the two disciplines. Starting with the philosopher Emile Meyerson's (...) discussion of the relationship between notions of invariance and causality in the history of science, the book surveys the history of conservation principles in the Western discussion of motion. Recourse to the metaphors of the economy are frequent in physics, and the concepts of value, motion, and body reinforced each other throughout the development of both disciplines, especially with regard to practices of mathematical formalisation. However, in economics subsequent misuse of conservation principles led to serious blunders in the mathematical formalisation of economic theory. The book attempts to provide the reader with sufficient background in the history of physics in order to appreciate its theses. The discussion is technically detailed and complex, and familiarity with calculus is required. (shrink)

By the term ‘mimeisthai’ (to imitate), as used to refer to a skilled activity (technè), was originally and primarily meant in pre-Platonic writings: the performance of acting and speaking persons in dance and the theatre and, on the other hand, the making of unmoving images in plastic art. In Plato the notion of artistic imitation (mimèsis ) is gradually extended to epic poetry (Republic). But in Laws finally all forms of muse-art (mousikè) - poetry, dance and music - as also (...) the arts of painting and sculpting are incorporated in the category of (artistic) ‘mimesis’. This could, however, only occur at the expense of a clear weakening of the original and pregnant meaning of the term ‘mimèsis’, whereby the idea of an active bringing about of sensible likenesses sank into the background: ‘mimèsis’ means then still as much as depiction or symbolic representation in general. Over and above ‘poetic’ representations are reproached on the grounds that - as a rule - they are untrue and deceptive (and thus also once again ‘imitations’ in the pejorative meaning of the word), that their ontological status is insignificant, and especially that they are morally pernicious. The consequence is that musical art (poetry and the dance and music tied to the poetic word) can no longer count as a proper art (technè), insofar as the latter needs to be based on genuine knowledge (epistèmè). Due to all these objections Plato considers that he must deny a right to existence (or civic right) to the muse-arts. But the plastic arts must also suffer. These are at best capable of reflecting the changing facets of the external manner of appearance of things and not what the things are essentially. They do not render genuine knowledge either, are not real arts (technè) and move - just like the muse-arts - in a world of ontological appearance. The only genres and themes of artistic mimèsis still tolerated in the ideal state are hymns to the gods and songs of praise for virtuous people (Republic). This decision is upheld in its entirety in Laws, where Plato makes a conditional plea on the behalf of the mimetic arts - he looks for the conditions which the practice of these arts must fulfil in order to be admitted by the guardians of the state. In this dialogue Plato defends the thesis that only the artistic imitations in which ethical models of high standing (human behaviour and characters ) - constitutive condition - in a correct manner (orthos) - logical condition - are represented, can be held to be ‘beautiful’ (eu, kalos). The only use and at the same time the only justification of the mimetic art lies in the moral good that can and must be brought about by this art. Plato undoubtedly considers the ‘phenomenal’ beauty of artistic work as a specific dimension of it; but he resolutely refuses to attribute any autonomy to it and equally he wishes not to appeal to it, even were it only for a partial justification of the mimetic work of art. If the phenomenal beauty is not at the same time subordinated to a correct imitation of ethically excellent models, a work of art - however fascinating it may be otherwise - cannot pass for ‘eu’ or ‘kalos’. In this respect it is highly significant that Plato in Laws insists that the task of composing hymns to the gods and songs of praise for virtuous men should only be entrusted to men who themselves are virtuous, even if these should lack natural musical talent. That Plato expects a mimetic work of art to furnish a correct depiction of models, which are worthy of the name, cannot be interpreted as if he were a champion of or at least took pleasure in a ‘naive’ or ‘flat’ realism, as some wish to convey. But no more can Plato be promoted to being a champion of an ‘idealising’ art, under the pretext that the mimetic artists should imitate the ‘Ideas’. Plato repeatedly and explicitely professes that mimetic artists, due to the special kind of imitation they exercise, are only able to imitate or represent sensible phenomena. Finally, in regard to the famous adage, ‘ars imitatur naturam’: this can in no way be traced back to Plato. Nowhere did Plato assert that all arts which we now refer to as ‘fine’ arts, are imitative arts (e.g. architecture). Even less did he raise up the (correct) imitation (of the phenomenal view) of nature to a constitutive, not to speak of a self-sufficient norm for the artistic beauty of a (mimetic) work of art. In other words, a consequent ‘realistic’ norm - in whatever meaning - for judging the proper significance of the work of art cannot under any conditions be attributed to Plato (trans, by J. Dudley). (shrink)

. . . Unlike Dewey, he has provided detailed incisive argumentation, and has shown just where the dogmas and dualisms break down." -- Richard Rorty, The Yale Review.

Mimesis as Make-Believe is important reading for everyone interested in the workings of representational art.

The A.W. Mellon lectures in the fine arts 1956, National Gallery of Art, Washington.

Introduction My claims are scandalously out of proportion with the general temper of the times and my literary background, which must be regarded by almost ...

Friedrich Nietzsche: Die fröhliche Wissenschaft. La gaya scienza Lesefreundlicher Großdruck in 16-pt-Schrift Großformat, 210 x 297 mm Berliner Ausgabe, 2019 Durchgesehener Neusatz mit einer Biographie des Autors bearbeitet und eingerichtet von Theodor Borken Erstdruck: Chemnitz (E. Schmeitzner) 1882. Textgrundlage ist die Ausgabe: Friedrich Nietzsche: Werke in drei Bänden. Herausgegeben von Karl Schlechta. München: Hanser, 1954. Umschlaggestaltung von Thomas Schultz-Overhage unter Verwendung des Bildes: Friedrich Nietzsche, Fotografie von F. Hartmann, um 1875. Gesetzt aus der Minion Pro, 16 pt. Henricus Edition Deutsche (...) Klassik UG (haftungsbeschränkt). (shrink)

Art appears to us historically. Hence, the historical meaning of art can best be understood by its clarification through a history of unconscious motives. This article applies to the classical arts and aesthetics (from Daedalos to Pygmalion) some theories ofRené Girard. Until the advent of the 'anthropométrie stage', art was solely concerned with the production of magic-ritual 'Objects' for the ritual, in which the experience oforiginal violence (Wieder-erlebung) took place. With the introduction of a religious structure, this original violence became (...) hidden away behind an abstract means, thus disabling the direct contact between man and force of nature. For the arts, we can identify 'mimesis' as this means, which consequently became the central aesthetical ideal. Anthropometric art, then, was no longer directed towards the truth of original violence, buttowards the representational truth of the myth and the religious order. Since mimetic representations can never be what they represent, truth and beauty were disconnected in the arts. The ideal of mimetic beauty, as expressed in composition or design, allows for a potentially infinite number of variations, covering truth as well as fiction. It seems that classical arts still expressed the truth, albeit in an increasingly remote manner (since original violence was progressively more hidden away). We specifically discuss forementioned evolution in classical drama (comedy and tragedy) and in Plato's and Aristotle's aesthetics and theories of art. (shrink)

In this article attention has been drawn to central issues of René Girard's thought such as mimesis, patterns of behaviour seen from the mimetic perspective, scapegoat mechanism, etc. Pivotal to Girard's work is the confrontation between a religious and a secular world view. The two motives in his thought, — on the one hand the motive of mimesis decoding human behaviour and on the other the religious motive according to which man is characterized by a need of transcendence —, might (...) be contradictory. Girard's statement that his beliefs emerged from his work and not from pre-existing beliefs may also lead to the consideration that the character of religion he attributes to the modern world and the character of the Christian belief as well change in accordance with the discourse of his two hypotheses. (shrink)