I think that a behavior by art is sending any message with a media selected by an artist freely. If there is people that can receive the message, the art will get to be popular. While, the message itself may not be understood by anyone except him in that day.
Now, I think that science and engineering can help an artist, if our viewpoint set to be "sending a message". Then I think that a purpose of art is that an artist sends his more message efficiently. There are reasonable grounds to think so, because science and engineering can also deal ununderstandable thing (is any element) as a black box. So, a message and its media may be black boxes, now. The message may be by word. Or, it may be anything for another media. Then, making any message is the most important for art. However, it is not only important for art but for other fields (for example, modern science, modern mathematics and so on). By the above means, I found that art has the same framework wtih science and engineering.

Though the most efficient method is a telepathy, we don't know how to use it. So we need and look for better idea on any existing media (is obedient to natural law).



Our inspirations and feelings are depended by our experience and instinct that is experience as life. For our life, we have been trying possibilities based by the inspirations and the feeling. If we have none, we can't be alive by only our self.
I thought that I don't know my life without any miracle, if I only know success stories by any miracle. If I can have any miracle, I will be able to implement an analogy of the success stories. However, if I never have had any miracle, I don't know what to do. Maybe, I will go astray.
One important point is that we have not been feeling subjective symptoms about why we turn out to be able to judge anything. Above all, we don't know the mechanism, also. Essentially, A experience is that my judgments are cause by myself. We have been experienced that troubles don't almost happen, though we can't know that it is truth. If we are not in our right mind, we can't notice our state of mind. I think that it is a property of the mechanism.
I think that we must know more about the mechanism for judging anything with less trouble. If we give up to know it, for example, we also can't know another possibility that we don't want to feel is that our judgments are controlled by others. At least, we should effort to know the parts found by science though we don't know all of the mechanism, if we are a psychologist. I think that a child (from 0 age) can't know and understand the mechanism by his little experience. So, others need present more information (including a behavior without any miracle, also) as experiences for judge his behavior. While, we may call culture a common part of the information in a community.
It is not skeptics but enjoying human wisdom. We should practice that we are different from a primitive man.


If our experiences for all information are without feeling any unpleasantness, learning any more information continue to be pleasures of life. If do so, unpleasantness must not exist anywhere. We can enjoy all. However, we can feel something enjoyment or unpleasantness. So, part of our experiences is with feeling unpleasantness. According to the above theory, I think that we must feel enjoyment knowing information without any experience, maybe. We think that it is known as desire for knowledge.


As an easy approach, I think that contents with original, novel and striking is sure to catch on. While contents with original, novel and striking, I said, include anything that we have not experience (in another way, include an axiom that can't be proved). At least, we can find out this approach from understanding a human mechanism. At the same time, we warn us harmless for any conclusion of the contents, because we have taken the information as any experience. Taking an information into our mind is selecting one of many possibilities.


As the next approach, I think that we try to link information without any experience with an experience that we have had. If we find any analogy in ours, we will feel anything resulting from the analogy. So, we can try to present to him information as the experience that he needs, before he finds anything. We can teach and input that he feels the information enjoyment by relating with enjoyment we have had. I define that such enjoyment inputted by others is the second order enjoyment.


It is the higher order enjoyment that we can't simplify relations with information and enjoyments. I think that we don't try to find higher order enjoyments in amusement field. I think that it is like academic enjoyment. Each of us has the different enjoyments. Contents that all of us can enjoy should be the low order enjoyment.


I say about feeling uneasy, because it is related to the above mechanism, greatly. I think that we feel uneasy by real or virtual experience without any information about it. A balance with information and experience is very important for healthy existence. At worst, we can't understand and remember so, when we experience it.
As far as that goes, people who directly associate nature are entirely bravery.


If we have no common part in sense of values (the merits of our experiences), only one of us may enjoy a work of art, entertainment, amusement and so on. At least, there must not be business, also. Fortunately, there are many popular works, because we have been having common sense of values. I think that the common senses of values are based by common experiences that is real or virtual.
The common senses of values have been changing gradually, though it includes the absolute truth that we said. In old days, the change is caused by common style of living in a comunity. In the present age, the change is caused by the mass-media, mainly. There is a possibility that the media acts indirect a play of its own writing. I may call it the runaway media. In short, an author's work becomes popular by his evangelism with mass media that his work is popular. We must not forget that there are many methods having his evangelism comes down to his fan. He doesn't need to directly speech his fun, if he has any proxy. In fact, his evangelism is transmitted by complicated paths form him to his fun. It is a part of the mechanism of common sense of values.
One important point is that the mechanism is not vice but indispensable. We should verify whether there is such mechanism for our work. We should enjoy his work, while, of course, we have known the mechanism. Conversely, we must hold our self responsible for the results from our works.
At least, people make their sense of values, themselves. If there is no people, there is no value.


By an ancient indian thought of esoteric Buddhism, "What you can feel must be in room. And, the room consist of them." So, art that we said must be also part of them.
By a modern mathematics (modern algebra, topology and symbolic logic), a room (as universe) may be a group with uncoutable infinity, though we can feel only infinity by our sense and feeling. And then, we will feel the room infinity, even if there is it confined within finit area.
So, I think that we may not feel uneasiness (Don't care) a size of the room that must be an axiom.

About a degree of importance over the room, I think that it is one of our feelings. So, there can be any sense by anyone that feel it important. For example, if it is out of topics by all peoples (including you and me), the words "important room" will have no sense. However, in world, there is my feeling that I like things with beautiful, lovely, cute, pretty, charming, interest and so on. In another way, my feeling can include that I like a part of art and room. So, there is any sense about the words "important room" in world. However, I can't think a degree of an importance about room. I think the words "degree of importance about room" has no sense.

Finally, I think that we can't know a size of the art room but that there is my feeling that the art room is important.

WARNING: My above message doesn't let one affirm anyone and it doesn't let one deny anyone. It can only explain a very simple case. Our world is very intricate case. So, it can't apply the world purely. Now, we should believe many historical experiences and knowledges for the world. For example, we should have equal rights on a law and on a rule.


For thinking our thought process, we need to discuss dynamics for knowledge, while statics for knowledge was a main topic in the previous discussion.

For our communication and thought, our knowledge will serialize to a sequence of something corresponding to symbols. Then, we will accumulate these knowledge in our inside. We must continue to accumulate knowledge from our birth to now in our inside anywhere. We will observe as our thought process that one information (or one message) creates another information. While I mean this information as a fragment of knowledge. This seems to be the same behavior as continuing to create and prove a theorem. I think that we continue to try to solve any problem from our birth to our last moment and that our egos are also caused from one of these activities.

We don't lose infinite possibilities, though we are restricted by statics as the previous discussion. We continue to investigate these possibilities for our satisfaction. So, we need to study dynamics of knowledge, for understanding our thought process.

Sometimes, we can't understand artist's work as message. For understand his work, we need to know any sequence of his works. The sequence is like a context. A context is very important for understanding a message. For understanding his difficult work, we must learn many things from him.

Copyright (C) 1997-1999. Hirofumi Inomata and its licensors All right reserved.