Prometheus18 wrote:
Twilightprincess wrote:
Prometheus18 wrote:
Benjamin the Donkey wrote:
Prometheus18 wrote:
Twilightprincess wrote:
My life could be described as a tragedy up until this point, but I still think there is much beauty and sublime experiences to be had in the here and now.
There's a melancholy about beauty and sublimity; they only ever
point the way towards happiness, always leaving something further to be discovered. I've come to believe that that
ne plus ultra can only be achieved by religious devotion.
There are shreds of happiness to be had here and there, but the balance of pleasure and pain will always favour the latter (for good biological reasons, if nothing else). The greatest happiness comes from devotion to our God on a personal level and, on an interpersonal level, striving not to bring pleasure to others (necessarily), but chiefly to rid them of their pain, which is far more preponderant. In secular terms, you can compare this to Popper's "negative utilitarianism". We must do all this in a spirit of humility and selflessness.
When you say "our God, " whose god do you mean? Thor? Zeus? Allah? Krishna? And what
about the sublime achevements of artists, philosophers and scientists who achieved personal meaning by devoting themselves to their work but had no need for a god, at least in the traditional sense?
The god that actually exists. Important to note, however, that all Muslims and some Vaishnavi Hindus identify their gods with the Christian god, so that there isn't necessarily any disagreement there about which is the correct god, but about what is His nature and what is the proper manner of worshipping him.
I would suggest that very little good art has been produced by nonbelievers. Philosophers and scientists aren't really relevant in a thread on the subject of culture, though it's obviously true that many prominent ones are/were atheists.
How would you define “good” art?
What you suggested above is a good working definition, though I'd add the qualification that good art must be
moral and
educative (in the etymological sense of "leading forth", or upward). It's this latter condition that excludes much modern art (or what passes for it), given that modern art is largely designed to undermine morality, self-respect and charity.
I would disagree with you here. I happen to love modern art. True art creates an emotional experience in the viewer while it tells us something about the human condition. Dadaism reflects that very nicely. Life is often chaotic, absurd, or ridiculous.
Looking at different art styles enables one to experience different facets of life whether it’s sublimity, passion, reverence, or irreverence. I would be extremely bored if every piece of art depicted a Christian theme. I love Egyptian art, cave paintings, Greek statues, and various renderings of Hindu gods or Buddhas.
An artist doesn’t need to believe in God (or the “right” god) to give us an emotional response and to tell us something about what it means to be human.
Last edited by TwilightPrincess on 26 Jun 2019, 9:03 am, edited 1 time in total.