Six

my post is my affirmation of my agreement with Heidegger

your asking a few diffrent questions here a couple i dont think necassarly represent the questions your asking.

Appolian and Dionysain - a novel its just a bunch of lines that form text but if you read it and have an experince usally emotional then it is more then just lines of text to you and to you it is art. If you read it and dont have any such experince is it still art? For me Pollocks work is garbage others pay millions for it is it art? Looking at art as a personnel prefrence will not tell you anything about art ie a person cant tell you very much about art but art can tell you alot about a person. your two questions which are reflections of an indivdual relationship with art will give you no logical truth and are philisophicaly valueless.

Which leaves only Heidegger a persons motivated to art so that the person can feel because we like to feel and a person is motivated to paint to capture a portion of themselves to live forever

or am i missing something?