German Car Zone - View Single Post

Imhotep Evil · **Re: In detail, New CL Class (Thread 6 Cont'd) -** 10-03-2006, 12:34 PM

When cars such as the R8 become their standard, rather than their exception, that's when they'll become a design leader.
I contradict your point that Audi's philosophy is holistic, since they don't have one. That's what VW/Audi din't realise when they started chassing the big boys.

Don't buy this. Their brand doesn't have a culture of their own.

I simply cannot agree with you Imhotep Evil, Audi have most certainly developed a strong principle/philosophy around the expression of technology through design. It is a very direct aesthetic, less emotional than BMW ..but no less metaphysical.

Here we'll agree to disagree. I would use the word sybolical/"tragical" as oposed to metaphysical.

Switching from Aero To Bauhaus to Humanity is evolution ?!
Not to mention that Audi have not created the brand image/philosophy of their own like the rest.

I have no idea what you are talking about ...Audi have been very consistent ...slowly evolving over time but still with the same basic tenets integrated into all their products.

Aero, Bauhaus, Humanity.
These are the design philosophies that Audi has chased/used/switched to in the last 25 years.

The idea/philosophy is the same, humanity, they said it themselves. It's just that the execution is very diferent.

So What? ...BMW didn't invent this idea either ...one could argue that Ferrari have been "human" since the beginning ...and certainly Pagani are very "human" -- what they are referring to is design that arouses emotional responses ....through semiotics and aesthetics.

Nope, BMW have been the ones who came up with the Humanity philosophy in design. For example, the asimetry of the BMW concepts, when asked Bangle replied that humans are not symetrical.

The arousial of emotional responses does not necesarily equall the Humanity philosophy chased by BMW.

As for Ferrari, in the begining it was about shape follows purpose (= to win races). Same with Pagani, their car looks like a LeMans sport-prototype from the 1980s.

The problem with assuming that the Modernist approach to design is lacking in "humanity" is that is fails to understand it in its actual context. Modern design, from which Audi takes its roots, is less emotional and more academic ....the metaphysics are perceived through an intellectual context -- much like how mathematicians or physicists can be deeply moved by the beauty of an equation or formula ...what may appear to be very uninteresting viewed through one context, can be very stimulation when viewed in another. Some people will listen to Mozart and just hear pretty music, while others will be deeply stimulated ...lifted to a higher place aesthetically or spiritually.

Have you ever had chills from a sculpture or painting -- or wept uncontrollably at some music that moves you -- something that stimulates your whole sense of humanity?

My point from my view is that Audi don't have a philosophy of their own behind their designs.
They, said that they wanted "to capture the human link", but BMW said the same thing earlier. I don't see how Audi is chasing after the modernist-lacking_of_humanity aproach, when themselves said quite contrary.

Are you not comfusing "man sybolical animal" with "metaphysical" man ?!

Also Nietzsche did not have a problem with religion in general, but with monotheistic/abrahamic religions.

In his critics of metaphysics Nietzsche was outraged by the fact that Shopenhauer considered moral (cristian moral based on the notion of sin ) part of the human nature.

And the metaphysical man thus becamed a christian man, a creation of christian philosophers. On his work "Birth of Tragedy" he proved Shopenhauer wrong.

Metaphycs is thus a buch of sterile words/sentences, and the metaphysical man an illusion-invention, anti-human. But man, seen by Nietzsche, is a creator, capable of developing symbols, his own universe.

I am no expert in Nietzsche, Imhotep Evil, I am impressed with your knowledge of him and Schopenhauer ...Nietzsche was the supreme existentialist ... he believed in human subjective existence over metaphysics. This does not directly relate to our discussion here.

I am using the term metaphysical as it relates to abstract thoughts and associations -- these may be subjective or cultural.

The point of it was, that for what you're saying Nietzsce would have used the words sybolical and "tragic", not metaphysical.