The value question is not what one would pay to get it back but what one would sell to give it away
In your example, the pot was valued at only 10 bucks by the theif. That 10 bucks has NO bearing on the value you place on it
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Why do people not think aesthetics are important?
- Thread starter drjsway
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The value question is not what one would pay to get it back but what one would sell to give it away
In your example, the pot was valued at only 10 bucks by the theif. That 10 bucks has NO bearing on the value you place on it
Regarding the father/son relationship. Someone could kidnap your father in the same way.
Appealing design, appealing aesthetics, justify a premium, but only if the promise made on the outside is kept on the inside. Any surprises should be positive ones, in the eyes of the beholder. That projects value to the observer, so that the premium paid seems worthwhile.
By the way, Patriks7, sorry we don't conform to YOUR fashion standards. Americans have wasted our energies doing things like kicking the Nazis out of Austria during WW2, so that you can be free to look down your nose at others.
By the way, Patriks7, sorry we don't conform to YOUR fashion standards. Americans have wasted our energies doing things like kicking the Nazis out of Austria during WW2, so that you can be free to look down your nose at others.
All good points but there have always been professional artists. Shakespeare made a living writing and Dickinson never had a day job (that I'm aware of).
The money aspect is unavoidable now. If you are truly a talented artist with a unique voice, people will throw money at you. And for some, that could be their ultimate goal. They certainly enjoy spending it. If their art still inspires millions of people, does that make them less of an artist?
Aren't they one and the same - or two sides of the same coin, a least?
Agreed, but, speaking purely in crass monetary terms and ignoring any nebulous 'sentimental value', $10 is what it's worth - since that's what I paid for it. Or, rather, that's what the market price was - misguided as it was, since the thief could've got more from me had he been smarter.
I really hope you mean to limit that to the world of art and not "anything" in general, otherwise the implications could be quite disturbing.
And even then, it may not be a bad rule of thumb, nevertheless I would reject the principle that art must have monetary value to be 'of value' in the general sense of the word.
I do however agree with the premise of this thread, which has been sidetracked from: the design aspect of Apple's notebooks (particularly the unibodies) is worth paying a design premium for. Whether one thinks $500 for design is worth it is another question, but I am of the opinion that if such design is not compensated for (which it is), there would be little incentive to make aesthetically pleasing things; which no matter what one's tastes is an important factor to the enjoyment of life. Not everyone, but a lot of people, enough people in fact to justify money and time being invested into such an area.
And iMacThere4Iam, America has also done many less than honorable things, but hey we're not putting America on trial here, now are we? I'm sure every country (cept maybe NZ) has done some stuff on the international scale which others find morally reprehensible, but I do not think this thread is the place to discuss such an issue.
No as it is only projecting the value placed by the theif
There is a difference between the theif saying he will sell for 10 bucks vs the person saying he will buy it back for 10
Right there. The fact that he could go higher implies thats not what the value is
But ten bucks is ten bucks is the market value. Not sure I'm following you.
But he didn't go higher. He set his price and $10, which I paid and therefore the market value was set.
Again, I'm only talking about money here. The undefinable sentimental value my be driving my actions, but $10 is the monetary price.
The notion of a "market" is rather pointless with this vase, there must be many vases and many buyers to determine a 'value' of the vase with this model.
This post has went bonkers. I was simply stating a few examples where there can be no set value. Art is the same way, one person may pay a dollar for a piece of art, where another person may pay 50,000 dollars for the same piece of art. Monetary value is again based on the individual looking at the item.
Others can argue that its actually based on what the majority of people will pay for it.
Once again all a matter of opinion.
Performance wise, aesthetics are not important. Now, in architecture, aesthetically pleasing shapes and designs end up being strong. Macs are made to look pretty b/c it helps them sell. If they wanted to sell based on power, they would make their products look like the hideous looking Alienware computers. O, and theyd get some powerful hardware.
I had to stop reading this thread at page 3...so much ******** collected in one thread it's unbearable. sigh