# Go slowly and enjoy! By [hamburger](https://paragraph.com/@hamburger-2) ยท 2023-03-24 --- The value of an artist is determined solely by whether it can be incorporated into a harmonious whole, which is often unexpected. He is capable of valuing what the average person values and undervaluing what the average person values. When valuing a thing, he knows persistence; When he downplays a thing, he knows how to get rid of it. Artistic ability is found not only in what is known, but especially in what is known. Su Dongpo's thesis, that is, like water in the valley, in what it has to do, stop at what it has to do. This is the right trade-off, so is the artistic life. People who are good at life for everything in the world, also take the taste of art to judge it. Those who suit the taste of art can become Mount Tai, and those who do not suit the taste of art can also become Mount Tai. Not only can he be serious, but he can get rid of it. He is serious when he is serious and open-minded when he gets rid of it. Meng Min rette, regardless of going away, Guo Linzong saw that strange. "The retort is broken," he said. "Why bother?" Spinoza, the philosopher, preferred to grind mirrors for a living rather than become a university professor for fear of interfering with his freedom. One night, when the snow was clear and the moonlight was clear, Wang Hui went to visit him in a canoe to Shengxi and rowed the boat back as soon as he got to the gate. He said, "When you come, you come back." These things are very different from each other, but you can see the open-minded artist. Great life and great art must be at the same time serious and open-minded victory. In the Jin Dynasty, most of the Qingliu only know open-minded but do not know serious, and in the Song Dynasty, most of the Neo-Confucianism only know serious but do not know open-minded. Tao Yuanming and Du Zimei Shu got it just right. A history of life is a kind of work. From an ethical point of view, it has the distinction between good and evil, and from an artistic point of view, it has the distinction between beauty and ugliness. What is the relationship between good and evil and beauty and ugliness? In a narrow sense, the value of ethics is practical, while the value of aesthetic feeling is super-practical. Ethical activities are doing something while aesthetic activities are doing nothing. For example, benevolence, justice, loyalty and so on are good, ask them why they are good, we can't help but focus on the happiness of the crowd. What makes beauty beautiful is the image of beauty itself, not its utility to the crowd (which is not to say that it has no utility to the crowd). If there were only one person in the world, he would not be able to have moral activities, because only father and son can have filial piety at all, only friends can have faith at all. But this lonely man of imagination can have artistic activities, he can enjoy the world in which he lives, he can create works. Goodness depends on something and beauty has nothing to depend on. The value of goodness is "external", while the value of beauty is "internal". But the distinction is narrow. Broadly speaking, good is a kind of beauty, evil is a kind of ugliness. Because ethical activities can also cause aesthetic appreciation and aversion. Plato and Aristotle, the great philosophers of ancient Greece, discussed ethical issues with the view that the good has a hierarchy. The general good has only external value, while the "supreme good" has intrinsic value. What is this "supreme good"? Plato and Aristotle went from an idealistic extreme to an empirical one, but on this question, they agreed. They all think that the highest good is Disinterested. This view has a great influence on the Western philosophical trend of thought, the theories of Spinoza, Hegel, Schopenhauer can be referred to. From this, we can see that the "supreme goodness" in the minds of Western philosophers is still a kind of beauty, and the highest ethical activity is still an artistic activity. How can "playing for nothing" be regarded as "the supreme good"? The question relates to Western philosophers' conception of God. God has been a compassionate moralist since the time of the Jesuits. In the eyes of the ancient Greek philosophers and the modern Leibniz, Nietzsche and Schopenhauer, God is a great artist who creates the universe for his own creation and appreciation. It does not make God any less. The god of the Jesuits is a rich giver among a class of poor beggars, but the god of the general philosopher is a musician to whom the universe is the music and in which harmony is found. Which of these two ideas is great? In the view of Western philosophers, God is just a spirit whose activities are absolutely free and unrestricted, while man is limited by the needs of his body and cannot be absolutely free. The more man is able to free himself from the limitations of his physical needs, the closer he is to God. "Doing something for nothing" is the only free activity, so it becomes the highest ideal. This remark seems somewhat mysterious and should not have been mentioned here. But believe it or not, there are many ideas worth pondering as an image. I myself enjoy reading philosophy books in my spare time. To be honest, I'm skeptical of what many philosophers say, but I find them interesting. After all, I think that all philosophical systems can only be viewed as works of art. Philosophy and science, to the extreme, are to satisfy the desire for knowledge. Every philosopher and scientist is amused by what he sees as a bit of truth, whether it be true or not, and admires it with enthusiasm. Truth is already the object of beauty when it leaves utility and becomes the center of interest. Scientific facts such as "the earth moves around the sun" or "a square plus a square equals a square string" can be as thrilling as "Eros" or the Ninth Symphony. Scientists seek such facts to the end precisely because they can shock the soul. Therefore, scientific activity is also an artistic activity. Not only goodness and beauty are one, but truth and beauty are not separated. Art is an activity of interest, and the life of art is a life rich in interest. People can be divided into two kinds. One is rich in taste. They are interested in many things and seek to enjoy them everywhere. The other is dry, having no interest in many things, and not seeking it, but fighting with maggots all day long. The latter are lay people, the former are artists. The richer the taste, the happier the life. The so-called artistic life is the taste of life. "To find interesting" is to appreciate. Whether you know life depends on whether you can appreciate many things. Appreciation is "the toy of doing nothing". People are as free and blessed as gods in appreciation. In an Alpine valley there is a big motorway with beautiful scenery, along which a placard advises visitors: "Take your time and enjoy!" Many people have lived their lives in this world of motoring, like a joyride in an Alpine valley, rushing through it so quickly that they have no time to look back at the scenery, and the rich and gorgeous world has become a dull prison. What a pity it is! Before I say goodbye, my friend, I take the Alpine slogan and add three words to the Chinese farewell idiom: "Go slowly and enjoy!" --- *Originally published on [hamburger](https://paragraph.com/@hamburger-2/go-slowly-and-enjoy)*