The anthropomorphic abstraction creates in the mind of the viewer an ontological paradox. Reality is inaccurate, and the most unreal is concrete, objective, and warrantable.

Result #1

The anthropomorphic abstraction creates in the mind of the viewer an ontological paradox. Reality is inaccurate, and the most unreal is concrete, objective, and warrantable. This is one reason ancient societies were such good at thinking; if we can not believe in the truth, we will be able to identify with the myth. More than that, many of the myths are based on a faith in the truth, a faith rooted in religious dogma and the rhetoric of religious dogmas. Even when the myth fails to connect with our personal experience, it still resonates with mythic truths. What is important, then, is not the truth, but how we perceive the truth. The way we think is vital. Such thinking is also a source of power.In the Middle Ages, people used words to communicate messages. In today's world, words are a means of communication. They are not only very useful, but can also be very dangerous. The power of a word can destroy the relationship of words with reality, as the power of language in the Middle Ages could destroy the relationship of reality to language. In ancient times, words were very powerful. The language of the Greeks, of the Egyptians, of the Persians, was very rich. Words had power; today, it is not so powerful. We have a lot of words, but it is too hard to communicate with them. Today, however, words do not have power, and we have no power to use words. The power of words is comparable to that of a dagger, a rapier, or a shield. Words have a very powerful presence in the world, but we cannot use them without having to give up our humanity and our humanityness.In the Middle Ages, a social order was based on strict rules, but now we have lost the authority of the rules. The hierarchy of society is based on hierarchy; we are now in the age of chaos. We cannot really control chaos. Life is chaos. The Middle Ages were based on order, but now chaos has entered society. The change is in the physical world. In the Middle Ages, life was based on rules.

Result #2

The anthropomorphic abstraction creates in the mind of the viewer an ontological paradox. Reality is inaccurate, and the most unreal is concrete, objective, and warrantable. And so the mysterious part of art is the word that reproduces reality, like the evidence of a crime scene or an autopsy, and the photograph is an image of an autopsy. Nowhere is it possible to go wrong with a photograph of a naked, shirtless, bare-chested, female figure. The dead woman is not a ghost, but is instead the model of a living being. She is the ultimate living being, the living embodiment of reality. Every photograph of the dead woman is a snapshot of a living living corpse, a reality that has no cause, no justification, only a correspondence between it and the photograph of the living body. Only an investigation of the dead body can give a concrete idea of its real nature. A photograph of an autopsy can never be a photograph of an autopsy, but only a snapshot of an autopsy, a reality that has no cause, no justification, only a correspondence between it and the photograph of the living body. This is the antithesis of Cartier-Bresson: The formal analysis of the dead body gives a form to an unreality, and the form is one of death.The reason that photographs can never be truths is not so much their material nature, which must be proven, but rather their hidden significance as an object of memorialization. The form of an autopsy can never be a photograph, but only a photograph, and the corpse is the subject of memorialization. When the corpse is placed in a photograph, the corpse is not a living corpse, but an image of death; the corpse is an image of the dead body; the corpse is an image of the shadow of death. The photograph cannot be the truth, and the photograph cannot be the truth. Without the photograph, no photograph can be a truth, and the truth cannot be a photograph.

Result #3

But it is also clear that Duchamp is no nihilist. He is not one of those who fantasize about the ultimate, ultimate truth of the world. It is, after all, something like that which is, after all, reality.

Result #4

The anthropomorphic abstraction creates in the mind of the viewer an ontological paradox. Reality is inaccurate, and the most unreal is concrete, objective, and warrantable. The idea of man as an automatic device of nature has been thoroughly codified, and so the concept of naturalism is an enigma. Man is an invention, a tool, and a strategy. Nature, man, and man are all artificial. Man is an invention of nature, an expression of nature, an objective with a philosophical basis. Nature is an absurdity, and man an attempt to bring nature back to life. In short, nature is an ugly, awful, and unjust system. Many a thinker of the past century and a half has tried to abolish nature, and while these attempts have been unsuccessful, nature is an ugly, ugly, and unjust system that is still in progress. The history of scientific progress is one of progress, of progress that will only be realized as technology advances. Nature is an evil, an evil, an unjust system, a terrible, and horrible thing. Nature is an eternal element, an element that we cannot escape. Nature is an unsolvable problem, an incomprehensible, an unendurable problem. Naturalism is an attempt to solve nature. The naturalist approach is the most radical way of dealing with nature. It is an attempt to reconcile the archaic and the modern. It is a continuation of the attempt to bring nature back to life. Nature is an unsolved problem, a mystery, an unbelievable, and terrible thing. Nature is an ugly, ugly, and unjust system, a harsh, painful, and abnormal system. Nature is an endless problem, an opaque, and terrible thing, a terrible, monstrous thing. Nature is an evil, an ugly, and unjust system. Nature is an unendurable problem, an endless, opaque, and terrible thing, a terrible, monstrous thing.Nature is an endless system, a dead system, a dead system, an unendurable problem. Nature is an infinite system, an unendurable problem, a complex system, an unendurable system.

Result #5

These forms, which are too complex to be grasped by the eye alone, must be seen as interlocking, that is, must be seen as mirrors of the same reality. The full-size trapezoid, the chthonic cube, and the highly complex rhomboidal structure, while they are identical to the real thing, are in a sense unreal because they are incapable of the illusion of being imaged, but not exactly impossible to find: one of the many abstract forms, like a beautiful rose, can be identified with the other, but when the two are the same they become nothing more than another familiar shape. Thus the complete sculpture of the Korean landscape is absolutely unreal because it cannot be duplicated. In this way, the human mind and the instinct to make perfect objects are one: they are completely different from one another. In this paradoxical situation, the human mind, based on the natural order, is an embodiment of the instinct to discover what is impossible to resolve in the universe. It is as if, in this irrationality, the human mind is a contradictory machine, one that tries to understand what is impossible to communicate. The human mind is a machine of symbols, a machine that attempts to grasp the cosmos in order to grasp its cosmic roots and to understand the world as it is.In the contemporary world, we can all be seen as encomiades of an increasingly deep unconsciousness, as an abstractionist with a vision of the universe, which, through the expression of the universe, we have already experienced. In this representation, the human mind is not only a form of ego, but one that creates an impenetrable image, an imaginary world that is internally transparent and intelligible. This universe is incomprehensible. In order to grasp it, we must first create an image, an abstract form. But this is the most difficult and most profound part of an understanding of reality.