The Watch Appreciation Thread - Part two (Rolex, Patek Philippe, Audemars Piguet, Jaeger LeCoultre,

[ronscuba]

Watch Discussion.

Let's get a petition going to submit it as a competitive Olympic sport.

Cuz yah know, internet discussions are not about sharing information and learning, but they exist as competitions where 1 person is the winner and the other is the loser.

 

[officine]

This **** has no become the AI Practice rant..........WT actual F???

But, is it as glorious?

 

[TheFoo]

”style is subjective” = “understanding and perspectives”

why would “style is subjective” exclude discourse of any nature?

Do you believe a person’s style can be improved by outside influences and ideas, such as what one might discuss on an internet forum? Then you don’t actually believe style is subjective.

 

[9thsymph]

Do you believe your style can be improved by outside influences and ideas, such as one might discuss on an internet forum? Then you don’t actually believe style is subjective.

hat trick!!!

 

[UnFacconable]

Just so we are clear on where we this all started, here are the original sentiments that I object to. Strong objective statements that attempt to exclude and preclude any other choices and to reinforce that Foo has chosen the one correct path. The idea that there is exactly one answer to any question worth asking. This is classic youknowFoo.

Are the two mutually exclusive?

Personally, I think the concept of “personal style” is a bit of a fallacy and certainly a misguiding notion.

Of course, the expression of style is individualistic (i.e. two people can each be very stylish yet dress and carry themselves completely differently), but development of any style worth admiring depends on refinement of knowledge, taste, discernment, etc. In other words, good style is the result of expressing what you learn—it doesn’t manifest in perfect form before that happens.

So, we can reduce every design and watch discussion to a matter of subjectivity, but that would hardly advance anyone’s “personal style”. Far more useful to attempt as much objectivity and rationality as possible.

100% agreed—which is why it is impossible to formulate a meaningful aesthetic perspective on watches without a fundamental understanding
of the technical aspects of watchmaking.

Similar to cars, our other mutual interest. The beauty of a car depends on its functionality. That’s why fake vents and useless wings are ugly to the initiated and harmless or attractive to those who don’t know better.

This is different from saying that peolple can benefit from additional knowledge or any of the softer statements Foo is retrenching into.

 

[TheFoo]

hat trick!!!

Subjectivity of a value, by definition, requires that such value be solely determinable by each individual relative to his unique preferences and needs. There is no way to fruitful way for two different individuals to discuss differing subjective values since neither has a rationale for their values that can compel anyone but themselces.

 

[Phileas Fogg]

This **** has no become the AI Practice rant..........WT actual F???

But, is it as glorious?

We talkin’ ‘bout occlusions. Occlusions.

 

[TheFoo]

Just so we are clear on where we this all started, here are the original sentiments that I object to. Strong objective statements that attempt to exclude and preclude any other choices and to reinforce that Foo has chosen the one correct path. The idea that there is exactly one answer to any question worth asking. This is classic youknowFoo.





This is different from saying that peolple can benefit from additional knowledge or any of the softer statements Foo is retrenching into.

You are conflating arguments.

 

[9thsymph]

Just so we are clear on where we this all started, here are the original sentiments that I object to. Strong objective statements that attempt to exclude and preclude any other choices and to reinforce that Foo has chosen the one correct path. The

Subjectivity of a value, by definition, requires that such value be solely determinable by each individual relative to his unique preferences and needs. There is no way to fruitful way for two different individuals to discuss differing subjective values since neither has a rationale for their values that can compel anyone but themselces.

grand slam!

foo, look up the word “empathy”

and now imagine a discourse involving empathy?

 

[LA Guy]

No, the point is not “oft missed.” It’s just not functionally interesting or helpful. We all know that one cannot prove what is right or wrong in terms of style. However, we cannot probe for any degree of objectivity or interesting new perspectives without trying. If one believes those goals are unachievable, discussion is pointless to pursue at all.

I would disagree that it's not interesting or helpful. Finding the right paradigm in which to view things is, at least to me, the most interesting part of fashon.

The best designers challenge us to look at the world a little differently, to think about our ideas of what is beautiful. Even looking at suits, a lot of the terms thrown around come from bringing an Italian cultural perspective to a garment that in English in origin, and the Italian interpretation of which differs dramatically from the English.

To me, that least, that type of discussions if far more interesting than arguing overwhether a button should be 1" higher, or whatever. I mean, there is a place for that as well, but the water for interesting conversations there dries up quickly. I'll hasten to say that "It's all subjective" is equally, if not more, boring, as a starting point for any discussion.

 

[9thsymph]

Also, what’s with the sock puppets amongst us? Fok?

 

[TheFoo]

@9thsymph

Empathy, which means ascribing equal or greater value to another’s experiences or feelings compared to one’s own, requires surrendering subjectivity.

 

[9thsymph]

Empathy, which means ascribing equal or greater value to another’s experiences or feelings compared to one’s own, requires surrendering subjectivity.

Says who? It means suspending, not surrendering. You don’t succumb to those with whom you empathize. You suspend one perspective for another, in an effort to understand, not [necessarily] change.

 

[9thsymph]

Also, sock puppet detected on this thread...

 

[TheFoo]

I wojuld disagree that it's not interesting or helpful. Finding teh right paradugm by which to view things is, at leat to mr, the mist interesting part of fashon.

The best designers challenge us to look at the world a little differently, to think about our ideas of what is beautiful. Even looking at suits,a lot of the terms thrown around come from brining an Italian cultural perspective to a garment that in English in origin,m and the Italian interpretation of which differes dramatically from the English.
To me, that least, that type of discussions if far more interesting than arguing overwhether a button should be 1" higher, or whatever. I mean, there is a place for that as well, but the water for interesting conversations there dries up quickly. I'll hasten to say that "It's all subjective" is equally, if not more, boring, as a starting point for any discussion.

Then what are disagreeing with me about? I have been arguing and have always argued that it is more fruitful to discuss style as if their are paradigms, perspectives, ideas, etc., that can improve our own point of view.