Roberto Strappafelci writes in response to me concerning Art:

>>If there is a final meaning, what source determines that meaning?
>
>Anyway, my point was that behind statements such as "lets stop
>pontificating about objective views" there is always the acceptance of
>a different objective view.  Super-parts positions about this matter
>often reveal inclination to "enlightened despotism".

I regret that Roberto resorts to armchair psychology instead of addressing
the more interesting issue of final meaning and where it comes from.  At
the present time, I can think of three forms of *value*.  One is market
value which can shift at any time.  A second is value in use which changes
given any alteration in use.  The third is intrinsic value, and I have no
doubt that many things do have intrinsic value to a particular individual.
But how can you translate that into an intrinsic value for others as well,
one which is constant among people?  Is intrinsic value simply decided by
each individual as is the case with a definition of music.  Does
Beethoven's Choral Symphony have intrinsic value?  I'd like to read some
views on the subject, although I first have to find a nice little country
that I can take over and then enlighten the native folk.

Don Satz
[log in to unmask]