Interesting hypothesis. I am not about to refute it completely either.
(Although I may turn to 'states-of-mind' from time to time.)
However-
Your example of musicians is also interesting, but- and here even such a
tied-down-at-the-stake aesthetician as myself begins to twinge- where is
the 'art' of the musician, and is there not a point at which a level of
intoxication is detrimental? (Not that I'm a big Deadhead, but some of
their stuff was simply gawdawful, and it coincided with their most
drugged-up states.)
And there are levels of achievement here as well. The performance of an
improvisational electric rock band is not Brahms' Third, nor could Brahms
be performed adequately by a stoned orchestra. Yes? There is no evidence
that Brahms was an addict of anything. (And the list of composers without
drug connections is long and withering evidence against your position.)
But art and its creation is one of the (to me) true philosophical
subjects.
*****************
Wade T. Smith
morbius@channel1.com | "There ain't nothin' you
wade_smith@harvard.edu | shouldn't do to a god."
morbius@cyberwarped.com |
******* http://www.channel1.com/users/morbius/ *******