Religion and Ethics Forum

General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Nearly Sane on January 12, 2019, 10:17:35 AM

Title: The ruins of St Peter's Seminary
Post by: Nearly Sane on January 12, 2019, 10:17:35 AM
The sad saga of St Peter's Seminary continues.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-46822229
Title: Re: The ruins of St Peter's Seminary
Post by: ad_orientem on January 12, 2019, 10:31:53 AM
Not being a fan of modernist architecture, the best thing for it is to be bulldozed. Ugly building.
Title: Re: The ruins of St Peter's Seminary
Post by: Nearly Sane on January 12, 2019, 10:42:36 AM
Even what we might individually consider ugly buildings can be important and since ugliness is a subjective opinion, it's fairly useless for deciding what is worthwhile. I went to Hinterland in the building and I found it rather beautiful i in that appearance.
Title: Re: The ruins of St Peter's Seminary
Post by: Steve H on January 13, 2019, 08:57:49 AM
Ugliness and beauty are not completely subjective; rather, they are inter-subjective.
I have nothing against modernist design in general, but this building seems to have no great merit. Bulldoze it, I say.
Title: Re: The ruins of St Peter's Seminary
Post by: Nearly Sane on January 13, 2019, 09:16:01 AM
Ugliness and beauty are not completely subjective; rather, they are inter-subjective.
I have nothing against modernist design in general, but this building seems to have no great merit. Bulldoze it, I say.
No, you don't understand the term intersubjective. That's merely the argumentum ad populum. You are correct in the idea that the market in one sense is always right but only in its own terms.

Have you ever visited the building?
Title: Re: The ruins of St Peter's Seminary
Post by: Steve H on January 13, 2019, 10:23:08 AM
I do understand the term inter-subjective, and I certainly don't believe that the market is always right, which I didn't say or imply.
Title: Re: The ruins of St Peter's Seminary
Post by: Roses on January 13, 2019, 10:23:54 AM
It is a ghastly looking building, which is very reminiscent of the former council offices in our nearby town, which I believe will be demolished and homes built there instead.


Title: Re: The ruins of St Peter's Seminary
Post by: Nearly Sane on January 13, 2019, 10:31:48 AM
I do understand the term inter-subjective, and I certainly don't believe that the market is always right, which I didn't say or imply.
The market is intersubjective in the sense you used the term. So you are contradicting yourself.
Title: Re: The ruins of St Peter's Seminary
Post by: Steve H on January 13, 2019, 12:30:16 PM
Original comment grudgingly deleted, before I get suspended again. Standards of beauty and artistic merit are inter-subjective, meaning that they are broadly agreed on, though they are not, obviously, objective. If they were merely subjective, then popularity would be the only guide to to artistic and literary merit, and Patience Strong would be the greatest poet of modern times. As it is, even people who like her doggerel and never read real poetry would probably admit that she's not a great poet. Artistic and literary merit's inter-subjectivity must be qualified by saying that it is the judgement of those who have studied and thought deeply about the subject.

Moderator: content removed.
Title: Re: The ruins of St Peter's Seminary
Post by: Robbie on January 13, 2019, 12:36:05 PM
It is a ghastly looking building, which is very reminiscent of the former council offices in our nearby town, which I believe will be demolished and homes built there instead.

Agree it looks like a municipal building, when I looked I thought of an ugly block of council flats but what you describe sounds more like.

I'm with Oliphant.
Title: Re: The ruins of St Peter's Seminary
Post by: jeremyp on January 14, 2019, 09:17:34 AM
The sad saga of St Peter's Seminary continues.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-46822229
It would have been nice if they could have posted some pictures of it before it fell into ruin.
Title: Re: The ruins of St Peter's Seminary
Post by: jeremyp on January 14, 2019, 09:24:47 AM
Ugliness and beauty are not completely subjective; rather, they are inter-subjective.
I have nothing against modernist design in general, but this building seems to have no great merit. Bulldoze it, I say.
I'm not an expert on architecture, but to me the building looks like a very interesting example of the state of the art in the 1960's. I'd say it has a lot of merit, if not actual beauty.
Title: Re: The ruins of St Peter's Seminary
Post by: Robbie on January 14, 2019, 09:33:12 AM
That is subjective opinion.
Oli stop being so self deprecating, you've said nothing wrong.
Title: Re: The ruins of St Peter's Seminary
Post by: Nearly Sane on January 15, 2019, 01:06:03 PM
Original comment grudgingly deleted, before I get suspended again. Standards of beauty and artistic merit are inter-subjective, meaning that they are broadly agreed on, though they are not, obviously, objective. If they were merely subjective, then popularity would be the only guide to to artistic and literary merit, and Patience Strong would be the greatest poet of modern times. As it is, even people who like her doggerel and never read real poetry would probably admit that she's not a great poet. Artistic and literary merit's inter-subjectivity must be qualified by saying that it is the judgement of those who have studied and thought deeply about the subject.

Moderator: content removed.
So what's the measure of merit? BTW given that you haven't studied architecture, then surely you are arguing that if those that have can be considered 'right', then your opinion is worthless by your own logic?
Title: Re: The ruins of St Peter's Seminary
Post by: Nearly Sane on January 15, 2019, 01:07:06 PM
That is subjective opinion.
Oli stop being so self deprecating, you've said nothing wrong.
Though you are disagreeing with his idea that there is such a thing as intersubjective validation.