P-51D

More importantly, it's irrational to be concerned about not being able to
replace the airplanes. They aren't useful objects anymore (except, perhaps,
for the entertainment value they provide at air races and other airshows).

The Mona Lisa isn't useful either I suppose.

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" wrote in message
...
The Mona Lisa isn't useful either I suppose.

No, it's not. It's wonderful that it exists, but there would be absolutely
no suffering in the world should the original Mona Lisa painting be
destroyed. Some people would irrationally bemoan the loss of the painting
(forgetting that the painting WILL eventually be destroyed one way or the
other), but that doesn't make it useful.

Of course, I am assuming you're talking about the original. Most people
have not even seen the original, but there is no shortage of replicas for
those people to appreciate. Likewise, even if the very last P-51 were
destroyed, it would take a LOT longer for there to be no replicas, no
reference, no knowledge whatsoever of it.

Frankly, I don't have a problem with people holding as precious objects like
the P-51. They should recognize the irrationality and futility of doing so,
however (though, of course most probably do not).

Pete

Frankly, I don't have a problem with people holding as precious objects
like the P-51. They should recognize the irrationality and futility of
doing so, however (though, of course most probably do not).

Well, if we're to go down that philosophical sinkhole, you had better be
prepared to have all of your best-loved, most cherished beliefs and ideals
shattered.

Taken over geologic time, everything is dust in the wind. That doesn't mean
we shouldn't strive for some semblance of permanence and order -- it only
means that we are, inevitably, finite.

For the purpose of sanity, however, most of us choose to think in historic,
not real, time. While this may not be 100% truthful, it is neither
irrational nor futile.

Thus, we must preserve the Mustangs!

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:anZCe.186202$xm3.145092@attbi_s21...
Well, if we're to go down that philosophical sinkhole, you had better be
prepared to have all of your best-loved, most cherished beliefs and ideals
shattered.

Why? I'm not saying that we shouldn't hold those beliefs. Just that they
are irrational.

Human beings are irrational. It should be no surprise that human beings
hold irrational beliefs. More importanly, it should be no surprise to find
that other human beings hold different irrational beliefs.

[...]
Thus, we must preserve the Mustangs!

You are welcome to hold that irrational belief. I don't happen to share it,
but many people agree with you. They are just as irrational about it as you
are.

My comment was simply one of observation, and I probably wouldn't have even
brought it up except for a handful of people here criticizing religious
beliefs as irrational. As if those people didn't have their own irrational
beliefs.

Pete

I'm not saying that we shouldn't hold those beliefs [that P51s
and fine art should be preserved]. Just that they
are irrational.

I'm not convinced that they are irrational beliefs. Fine art brings joy
to (some) people, and restoring and flying warbirds brings joy to (some)
people. Given that, while we all end up dead, we spend a fair amount of
time alive, the pursuit and spread of joy seems like an eminently
rational thing to do.

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" wrote in message
...
I'm not convinced that they are irrational beliefs.

By the definition used to describe those with religious faith as
"irrational", they most certainly are "irrational beliefs".

Fine art brings joy to (some) people, and restoring and flying warbirds
brings joy to (some) people.

Racing warbirds brings joy to (some) people as well. Why is it so insane,
then, to race them? Especially if it's perfectly rational to do something
that brings joy to people?

Pete

By the definition used to describe those with religious faith as
"irrational", they most certainly are "irrational beliefs".

What definition is that?

Racing warbirds brings joy to (some) people as well.

Then racing warbirds is an eminently rational thing to do.

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

I'm not convinced that they are irrational beliefs. Fine art brings joy
to (some) people, and restoring and flying warbirds brings joy to (some)
people.

Oh, no. You've brought up "fine art" -- surely the sign of a dying
thread...

;-)

Seriously, "fine art" is truly in the eye of the beholder. What brings joy
to some brings pain to many.

An example: Here in Iowa City, a certain percentage (2%?) of all public
building budgets must go to the purchase of "fine art" to be displayed in
front of/inside the facility.

Since, as home to the University of Iowa, virtually ALL buildings are
public, we have an enormous amount of "fine art" that is both (a) incredibly
expensive, and (b) truly awful. Yet, despite the number of
horrible/laughable pieces on display, each and every one went through some
sort of a selection process, and was selected by a committee of "experts" on
its merits -- so *someone* thought it was "fine art"...

P-51 Mustangs as art? While I like the concept, I don't think you'll get
too many non-aviation nuts to agree.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Seriously, "fine art" is truly in the eye of the beholder. What brings joy
to some brings pain to many.

An example: Here in Iowa City, a certain percentage (2%?) of all public
building budgets must go to the purchase of "fine art" to be displayed in
front of/inside the facility.

I am arguing from the point of view that the =owner= of a piece of fine
art gets to perform that piece, not that the government gets to charge
us for his privelage. In the case of the P51s, we are discussing
whether or not the owner of the P51 should be able to do stuff with or
to it, and whether or not the desire to do so is "rational". I don't
argue that the P51 is (or isn't) fine art, just that its =usefulness=
(now) relates to the joy it brings, and because of that preserving a P51
is not irrational, neither is flying it.

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

("Jay Honeck" wrote)
[snip]
P-51 Mustangs as art? While I like the concept, I don't think you'll get
too many non-aviation nuts to agree.


http://info.detnews.com/joyrides/story/index.cfm?id=537
Is Ralph Lauren's collection of rare classic cars really art?

Yes.


http://www.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/past_exhibitions/motorcycle/motorcycle.html
Art of the Motorcycle - Guggenheim 1998
(Click the dates on the left side)

Speaking of flying art, the B-24 Liberator (Witchcraft) is sitting on the
ramp at Golden Wings Museum this morning with an engine removed. Another
engine is being flown or trucked in today.

Collings Foundation was at our airport this weekend, B-17 and the B-24.
http://www.collingsfoundation.org/menu.htm

Witchcraft (8th Air Force) is the same B-24 as Dragon & His Tail (Pacific
Theater) ...just repainted in olive drab.


Montblack