If humanity is so small and insignificant in comparison to the

File: image.jpg (100KB, 575x768px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 575x768px

>a careful edited record of a person's ideas and stories lives on after our pitifully short lived
Why do you think the epic of Gilgamesh is so bittersweet?

Because it transcends time.

>>7674662
What if art doesn't survive our existence?

>>7674662
But then who does art become suited for if not us? (assuming there is no extra-terrestrial life)

>>7674625
It only really serves a purpose for us in the moment as potential ways of educating, contemplating and entertaining ourselves.

If 1000 or so years in the future or whenever, and humanity becomes extinct, then it forms historical artefacts for the next intelligent evolved being that takes our place. We all know that's the androids.

Why would you consider art as significant, if you think the whole of human existence isn't?

File: image.jpg (922KB, 2592x1944px) Image search: [Google]

922KB, 2592x1944px

>>7674691
Sucks2suck get good scrub
>>7674697
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=T3dpghfRBHE
You won't ever see it end. Thinking on cosmic timescales will give you the heebie jeebies to be sure

>>7674739
I'm not, I'm considering why people consider it significant if humanity is such a minuscule aspect of existence.

what the fuck else am I supposed to spend my time doing? trying to make contact with aliens to pray for their invincibility serum? praying?

fuck that y'all ima write

>>7674763
Who's 'people'?

art is just a sport and a pastime :^)

>>7674727
by then we'll have technology enough to send a kajillion terabyte USB stick into space with all the episodes of Hollyoaks so then our humanity can be discovered so we don't need to worry about losing glorious art.

>>7674770
People who consider art significant.

it's not.

>>7674778
Nietzsche said it was in The Birth of Tragedy.

It obviously only makes sense with humans around.

>>7674625
>If humanity is so small and insignificant in comparison to the wider existence, then why is art, such as literature, considered significant at all?
A silly question to be honest. Humanity is insignificant COMPARED to wider existence, but in our own realm we are the most significant thing in the universe.

it's only for avin' a giggle m8 dont worry about it jus go to a gallery 'mirin sum art n av a r8 giraffe m8

>>7674727

I'm rooting for dolphins tho. Dolphins and bonobos.

it's significant to humans while they still exist

>>7674625
woah dude, what if MATRIX

>>7674965
we all know it's going to be the ant overlords

Art is really only going to resonate with humans on a personal, intellectual or emotional basis.

Maybe if there's super-intelligent hyper-evolved beings when we're long gone then they'll have their own form of way of appreciating what they consider art.

Art is bound to be very personal and it doesn't necessarily need to be some huge, gargantuan thing that exists forever. There's something intimate and beautiful about that.

>>7674625
>if [undemonstrated and on the face of it unlikely sounding assertion A], then why B?
I don't know, OP. If unicorns exist and shit diamonds, then why hasn't somebody found a way to monetize this?

File: escher5.jpg (906KB, 1024x1288px) Image search: [Google]

906KB, 1024x1288px

Humanity is not insignificant at all. In fact, it is very interesting that you use that word. What is insignificant is what is not signified, seen as a sign, and humanity, if anything, is the most significant thing there is, because we are precisely the ones signifying the world and ourselves, talking about ourselves, depicting ourselves, creating roles and fantasies and ideas that support our existence.

The farther we look, the more we look back and think we are small. This is true to those who see God "up in there" almighty, those who look at the stars and atoms outside of our sensible scale, those who learn history and language and know how complex these interwoven stories and versions can be of the world. You go there and look back and think what we are doing is meaningless in relation to it, because you have seen what is significant in that to its own scale. A political mistake between people we don't even know their name appears as essential to your current situation and what are you to do? A star explodes and what of the worlds it cradles?

But this is all an illusion. Indexical signs of past civilization, calculations on the subatomic, thoughts on bigger plans than ourselves... And what are our plans? And what can we do? We cannot change the world, but we can begin to change the world. You cannot even run to mayor in your town to fix holes in the street, but you can garden your backyard and see the results. While you're fixing the pencil drawing of a bottle, or humming a few notes that could go together, or speaking through a text about anything, these are not unimportant or irrelevant. That is not to say it is more important, for it does not exist in comparisson to the infinitely vast variety of worlds and lives that you could be having, but it is to say it is the only important, relevant and significant thing there is. Because it is there at that moment, at that place, making an impression on you and you can knowingly respond to it and see the effects of your actions. All that could be, before and after, is not what is in that very spot in which you can effectively live and act upon and in which you find yourself now, not in a selfish way to think that this moment and this life is worth more than any other existence, but a humble perception that it is what you are facing right now. And it's very easy to neglect it at the expense of what we idealize of being of real significance, of what could be, and all that wide space around us. We do not owe geniuses of the past or projects for the future anything. We do not owe the stars nothing. They are done and we are in the making.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGPPUY40Y7k

>>7675111
Unicorns don't exist, but humanity is a tiny fraction of existence.

Is there any books that have existential crises similar to OP's post?

>>7675357
No it isn't, because existence is not a whole thing. What is there to compare? Humans are giants to ants, tiny to planets, what of it? What fraction is that? 1/10, 1/1billiontrillions? It's just a way to perceive shit, that anon is right, it's as meaningless as the unicorn question.

>>7675365
Read Fernando Pessoa's Book of Disquiet

>>7675377
Thanks, will do

>>7674810
>but in our own realm we are the most significant thing in our realm

Fixed it.

>>7675374
How is humanity not a tiny fraction of existence? Many planets are much larger than our own, surely right there is an indication that we are a smaller fraction of everything else that exists and that outside of our planet we are nothing.

Art is just a luxury, everybody should go into the STEM fields ok

>>7675374
Carl Sagan said humanity was a small fraction of existence too ya know

>>7674770
did you not just read his post holy shit you dumb dumb

>>7675357
The OP post is about how -significant- humans are, not their physical size. What do you think is far more significant than humans, and to whom?

all dem alien niggas kno our planet da best in the game

It depends on how you define significant. Will a good book literally alter the course of galaxies? Obviously not.

But it could alter the course of several lives. Whether that matters to you or not is up to you.

>>7675446
Wait until we have inter-galactic federations and relationships in the next three thousand years. THEN a book might alter the course of galaxies, depending on the ideologies in each galaxy.

Of course, filthy bakas like us are not likely to understand language or perspectives as intellectual as theirs.

>>7675397
Anon, "existence" is not a thing, it's not whole. All of those planets will not matter to you as long as they exist in your world in this particular way. You are looking at them as facts, but let's think of facts then. That is, some of these planets are, to you, hypothetical existences (even if probable) based on fragments of light perceived by digital telescopes that is understood by the scientific community as stars far away and communicated to you as something that is there. They have supposedly been there through the middle ages and through ancient times and when there were only fish swimming around. They'll supposedly be there when you are dead and a thousand and ten thousand years afterwards.

The point here is not to discuss their existence, I'm not doubting it at all, just to question you on why it matters. Most likely you'll never reach them, most likely you won't even see a good picture of them in your lifetime and even if you could, you'd still not have time to pay enough attention to them. They won't change your life in any possible way, they might as well not exist and yet you have perceived and believed that they do. And what sort of feeling does this perceived existence evokes to you? Why consider them at all? You can live in one city or another and I guarantee that this is more of a crucial difference to you (and others on earth) than if the whole planet explode in flames or produces unicorns. You'll likely not even go to the moon, as well as visit Bhutan. Why is that the existence of a planet or an entire galaxy poses as such an oppressive force to you that you think humanity is meaningless? We humans can step on an anthill and kill thousands of them, but still, to most ants that live and has ever lived in anthills all over the world, we are as hypothetical and meaningless as those planets is to us.

You can sing a song and some people will hear it, but not everyone. Of those who heard it, they'll forget it, maybe in a day or when they are old, but still why does that mean your singing is meaningless if that role it performed is precisely what singing is about?

I raise the hypothesis that you are idealizing a way to be that is supposedly meaningful and significant and that is not an actual thing. A song that could last a billion years and reach all the galaxies in the universe. Would that be significant to you? But what of it? It will too be over and dead one day. It doesn't matter if the planets are there or not, you're idealizing its existence, this planet is not a visceral experience, but an idea floating in your head that makes you feel small, but you're not small, it is this idea that is small. The ant bites your foot and is bigger than the planet. You clean your dishes after a meal and that is more important to the future experience of yourself and others than that planet.

Anon, there is nothing to be compared with anything here. It's all empty and full, big and small. And existence is this, and only this.

>>7675406
Live up to your small fraction of life and suck a small fraction of his dead dick, you cunt :)

>>7675547
ebin mega lolz :^)

>>7675402
praise stems ok

>>7674625
Because pretentious monkeys want to feel like they will live on in the ideas they give to the world. Also some people really enjoy just writing for no real purpose.

Just people read too deeply into what book they have in front of themselves if it clicks with whatever life experience that person has. So like most things it's just a way to waste time and show off social status. It is also pretty efficient as a method of getting your ideas out there faster then just talking on the street.

>>7674625
because we seem to enjoy it and enjoy talking about it. if the exploring the universe was more important to society than music, books, and film we'd be on mars.

personally im glad we value art because its more fun to look at than rocks

>>7674625
why would the existence of anything but humans on planet earth be of interest to you or significant

1) Humanity is the most significant thing in the known Universe, as far as we know.

2) Fine art is essentially the highest level we've reached.

3) Therefore fine art is the most significant thing in existence.

>>7678352
>2) Fine art is essentially the highest level we've reached.
lol

File: Homère.jpg (9KB, 221x310px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 221x310px

>>7678354

You know it's true.

>>7678354
Kek, are you a philistine?

For the same reason you don't kill yourself simply because your life is insignificant.

File: 1441223769245.png (316KB, 570x530px) Image search: [Google]

316KB, 570x530px

>>7675015
This.

In situations like this, I just think of Ozymandias. Art serves a purpose for humans only. It's almost like a collective book of human thoughts. It comforts, educates, and entertains us alone (at least to our knowledge it will).

Hell, when we're gone, most of our art likely will as well, even just from miniscule events. But then why do we keep creating art if it won't last forever? Simple really, everything has an end, denying it is part of our nature as humam beings. But from this small time we have with our art it should really just make us apprecoate even more. Right?

Pic somewhat related.

>>7676224
ok thnk u