or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Philsophy of MC style
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Philsophy of MC style - Page 3

post #31 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post

H., I think you are conflating my philosophical discussion about the difficulty of overturning values related to dress and whether I am willing to give it a go. I see nothing contradictory in recognizing that a task is difficult while attempting to accomplish it.

 

Ah, I think I see.

 

Well, in that particular case, then logically, you're certainly absolutely right that there's nothing contradictory in that. I therefore wish you luck in your chosen Herculean task (and I'd certainly agree that more than a whiff of the Augean stables in some of the outfits posted occasionally!). My suggestions as to what would be the most effective methods to employ in your mission certainly still stand though.

 

I must say, personally, I would find taking up such a challenge exhausting and dispiriting (I almost never get involved in extended arguments, either IRL or on the internet). Perhaps it's a quirk of my profession, but I always love noting the differences between people in what energises them vs what tires them. Good luck and best wishes to you.

post #32 of 42
"persuading others only rarely happens through logic or force of argument, but through charm, persuasion and psychological manipulation"

Holdfast - that resonanted, setting aside any HF/Foo issues. I have adjacent and at times overlapping responsibilties with a colleague at work. I have a degree in art history, she in mathematics.

Both have their merit, though at times our conversations feel like we are from different countries - I'm all colours and pictures and adverbs. She''s all numbers and graphs and charts.Even when, as often, we agree, the ways of getting there are entirely different. That holds true here too.
post #33 of 42
I am glad I deleted my post
post #34 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post

Bounder, I don't think you understood anything that I said. If you don't understand the use of "master" and "slave" here, I refuse to believe you understood Fuuma.
post #35 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post

Bounder, I don't think you understood anything that I said. If you don't understand the use of "master" and "slave" here, I refuse to believe you understood Fuuma.

Bounder may be English, and therefore by definition taking the piss a little bit. We do that.

If not, he is doing a fair impression.
post #36 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geezer View Post

"persuading others only rarely happens through logic or force of argument, but through charm, persuasion and psychological manipulation"

Holdfast - that resonanted, setting aside any HF/Foo issues. I have adjacent and at times overlapping responsibilties with a colleague at work. I have a degree in art history, she in mathematics.

Both have their merit, though at times our conversations feel like we are from different countries - I'm all colours and pictures and adverbs. She''s all numbers and graphs and charts.Even when, as often, we agree, the ways of getting there are entirely different. That holds true here too.

 

Just to clarify, from my side (and I suspect from Foo's as well, though he can speak for himself), there are no "HF/Foo issues". I was genuinely curious what more he wanted from the board; he directly addressed the anomaly I perceived. The last thing I come onto SF for is to accrue issues with any other posters here! I just come here to look at pictures of pretty outfits and occasionally lose myself in a sociocultural discussion of clothing. :)

 

On the more general note, I really enjoy facilitating negotiations between rigid and imaginative people. It's great fun; you have to constantly switch "modes" bouncing between logic and charm while searching for a common frame of reference. It's very intellectually satisfying when you get both sides agreeing!

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RJman View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post

Bounder, I don't think you understood anything that I said. If you don't understand the use of "master" and "slave" here, I refuse to believe you understood Fuuma.

 

Good to see you posting!

post #37 of 42
HF - I was not suggesting, and I apologise if you read it as such, that you and Foo had personal "issues". But you clearly have different takes on this stuff, and as two of our most prolific and interesting posters, you ought -as you are - to debate them more oftem.
post #38 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geezer View Post

This is a good thread, potentially the most important of the "Old Guard" threads of the last few days, and overlaps with a number.
There is a contrast between the "analysers" and the "emoters". I'm afraid that I run on gut feeling, not detailed knowledge, and for all the threads that I've read on tailoring techniques or shoe construction, I tend to focus on the end product, rather than the process. As a mild extrovert, I think I am in touch with my emotions and deeply charming, whereas the others are anal-retentive boring nerds. The latter may well think I'm a superficial prick, We are both right and equally wrong, and should respect each other and focus on what unites us, not what divides. I still have no great idea how a shoe is made, but I know which shoes I buy.
On classism, all British people are born with an MBA in it. I was staggered decades ago by the way that Molloy in "Dress for Success" was so overt with his proposition that if you wanted to get on, you should dress like a member of the upper-middle class. Not that he was wrong, but that he was so honest in print, violating a rule of British hypocrisy (all people are hypocrites, and it is the lubricant of most societies) to not talk about stuff like that and to pretend it is not true.
I'm a mild optimist though on Foo's depressing analysis. Yes, "we" are outnumbered. But every generation has thought that it was now facing Total Decline Into Barbarism (inc. Plato's). What is happening is that formal wear and black tie are supplanted by lounge suit, lounge suit by business casual, and so on. But I would not have thought years ago that Knightsbridge hedgies would be getting their business casual made bespoke. And they are.
There is without doubt on this forum a tension between baroque/mannerist (Spoo? NORE?), neo-claccisicism (Foo, Manton), and something that might be modernism or post-modernism (whatever happens in SWD). But that, or some variant thereof, is a good thing.

A few important distinctions I think are worth emphasizing.

Being analytical about the conflict between classic men's dress and contemporary social norms and moral psychology does not require one to be analytical about how he dresses.

Also, being analytical does not mean one is not influenced by emotion. There are many theories as to what emotions are, but I see no reason why following logic or one's emotions represents an either/or proposition. Emotions can be viewed as inputs to one's logical thought process. I feel X, so I do Y to achieve Z, which will serve X, etc. A truly analytical person must recognize that all of his logical reasoning cannot directly uncover any empirical facts (though it might direct him to which is best to believe in). Emotions belong in the empirical realm. They are reactions to material things and events. So, there is no necessary conflict being emotional and logical. In fact, I posit that it may be impossible to think illogically--what we call illogical may simply be a sudden recognition of new empirical information one did not have before, which may change of obfuscate one's situation, and therefore his logical calculus as well.

On a similar note, I don't think being analytical about dress makes a person any more rigid. Being "emotional" about how one dresses can be equally restricting: "Yellow makes me sad, so I will never wear yellow." A simplistic example, but you can take it further on your own.

"Class" does not necessarily refer to socioeconomic class. The Dubiously Honored are also a class. Anything you can categorically distinguish from everything else is a sort of class.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuuma View Post

It is also rich that Foo, who just made a reference to the master-slave dialectic, would say I am using metalanguage too heavily.

To be fair, the master and slave is a theme that has dominated continental philosophy since Hegel. Also, the terms are colorfully transparent--I think a reasonably well-educated person can easily get at their general meanings in the context of discussion. Now, if anyone is confused by my usage of them, I would be happy to explicate.
post #39 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJman View Post


Thank goodness for someone reminding me what is fulfilling, at teh end of the day . . .

- M
post #40 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmkn View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by RJman View Post


Thank goodness for someone reminding me what is fulfilling, at teh end of the day . . .

- M
It's the law, b!tch.

Have you bought your RJ cat pocket square? Wang has them back in stock.
post #41 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post

Don't get me wrong--I will keep trying to participate until it's all over.
However, we have been through this before. People prefer what is easy over what is hard, all else being equal. The wise men (masters, higher types, whatever) will try to re-instate their rule, but so long as natural differences between people mean that the vast majority will never gain the same authority as the wise men, they will eventually break away and say it is evil to be wise. The forum management made a very interesting move by making some select members Dubiously Honored. I alluded to the meaning of this in the Transparent Moderation thread. We have been handed very great powers to re-take control of the discourse here (big guns, essentially). This is a form of coercion. It will work for a while. But either we will abuse our coercive powers and dwindle our population, or people will simply leave when they realize they can play in a friendlier, easier sandbox where they might be kings. Eventually, Rome will fall.


"I, Pliny the Foo..."
post #42 of 42
Art is not a flint of argument, it is simply for us to enjoy. Hence there is no need to manifest whether you enjoyed it or not.

I really enjoyed this thread.

The situation here is quiet similar to 'generation gap' in a nutshell, Am I right?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Philsophy of MC style