To not be ruled by form-the nihilist and the artist

To not be ruled by form-the nihilist and the artist

Audio Link

The difference is the nihilist bases his independence on the latitude given for  his behavior, while the artist bases his on his thoughts' latitude for their cognitive versatility. The artist accepts the inevitability of there being some subordination of practicality  at any particular 
moment, but that the overlord could not control the conscience which is responsible for the creative, procreative instinct. Even if  it's based on impulse, the impulse is the determinative architect of the consequence.

Unlike the nihilist who presumes an entitlement upon the moment for the action, for the 
artist it is the engagement of both mind and emotion, contending with what ever forms 
from and of which they would have to give shape to. The nihilist is more self-centered on 
how they are effected than the artist who is more focused on the change in the conditions 
of the perceived cognitive space.

For both, the surrounding conditions are a platform still incomplete and insufficient for 
their aesthetic or operational utility. The nihilist wants to be the performer for their own 
sake. The artist sees the external as an extension needing alteration so to be enhanced for 
its sake, than primarily for the artist's sake.

In either instance, the external is not something to be accepted as is, but a starting point for what can be. Forms, generally, are the first draft of  objective reality, not the immutable, 
literal definition for reality.