That is truly rich (sic). The amoral pressed into the phase
of the immoral and because it can, claim that the origin was already simply
amoral and hence the immoral acceptable as precedence. It is the narcissistic premise, already inherently dysfunctional, writ large and in keeping with predatory economic theory, the freeze-frame version of life as domination. But, not unlike its corollary the distortion of evolution as capacity to dominate rather than adapt to actual conditions, is doomed to mortal failure, or more aptly, to generate chaos from which advantage is seen to be gained (another (sic) or maybe just plain sick).
When the very basis of life is subjected to a failed theory incapable of stepping back from uncontrolled momentum, then aesthetics is no longer a marginalizable consideration. The reason for this being, as I see it, that aesthetics are an inherent aspect of human cognitive function regardless of the extent to which domination patterns extract from and prey on this function in order to control dominant advantage over time, our capacity to engage work, love, and above all, learning.
It's a perspective that is already cross-eyed but in such a way that that
you have to adopt a cross-eyed stance in order to see it. Like a cross-eyed stereograph requiring viewer to wear 3d glasses to pull the cross-eyed bird into 3D
An aesthetic gesture in an art project utilized by art professor Ted Hiebert to illustrate the claiming of the distorted plane in order to reclaim the integrity of direct personal experience.
For those who might want to explore artists and perspectives that have been marginalized for decades: a truly delightful and insightful 2013 introductory talk by Ted Hiebert on exploring the transparency of aesthetics