‘Communication’ meaning what exactly?

Art-Science-God: Divine Simplicity as in ; ) or in more familiar form :wink: Also $\downarrow$

I do take your point. It would be interesting if Barbie Dolls were taken as objects of worship. I came close to being misunderstood at work over my lion on my key ring, who I called Leonardo. I had a manager who discussed this in supervision and I think that she thought that I was psychotic and saw Leonardo as 'real'. There is a danger of speculation based on lack of direct understanding of the meanings of specific people.

The basis of my idea was mainly based on the ideas of a tutor who taught an anthropology evening class. He was a radical Marxist anthropologist, Chris Knight. He has published his ideas, which are backed up some research into the culture of the Aborigines. However, his views may be a bit 'alternative' rather than mainstream.

Art is based on the exchange of images or the imagination through the various arts and forms. To some extent, it can be possible to have private art which is about the personal discovery. However, art which is shared through exhibitions, magazines or other forms of transmission is about conveying ideas or feelings, in relation to an audience.

You say that art and science may be Divine Simplicity. This may be true sometimes, but it can be more complex because it may be that there are contradictions in the perspectives. For example, the idea of the fall at the beginning of the world may be recognized as a mythical description but this is not the established understanding of science. In this respect, art and science can be like two vastly different languages.

You speak of art's lack of ability to explore beyond beauty — Jack Cummins

Sorry Jack, I don't know how my typings on this thread, gave that impression. I was going for the exact opposite. I was typing about art and/or musics' ability to promote that which is NOT related to beauty in any way. The paintings I was suggesting would not be generally considered beautiful.

but there is not simply visual art but literature and music in particular. There is the whole notion of the gothic fantasy and horror, which also gives scope for questions about metaphysics and an arts based approach to the concept of God. — Jack Cummins

As I am sure you know, art and music can be treated as mere aesthetics by individuals or they can be supportive towards theism/atheism/revolution/political doctrines etc.

In the OP, there is:

To what extent is arts, a basis for understanding the symbolic aspects of the God question, rather than simply asking about the existence of God from a scientific approach. Is science and art completely divided here, or is it about juggling different models to understand the nature of reality? — Jack Cummins

I took this to mean that you were suggesting that all of the quite stunning and awesome religious art (for example) produced by Rembrandt, Michaelangelo etc can act as a basis for understanding the human need for/tendency towards/attraction to the god posit. They glorify the image and idea of god and its subordinates and I thought you were suggesting that this 'human effort' towards manifesting god pictorially has meaning and value towards understanding the 'human need,' for god.

If I am correct towards your intention in the OP then I disagree and I firstly suggested paintings of Dante's 9 circles of hell to suggest that art has also used THREAT to try to enforce submission to the god posit. I then tried to suggest how art could be used by the atheist side to counter the 'glorification' art used by religions now and in the past.
Same in music, I can counter glorification praise hymns with songs that glorify and praise humanism.
So I don't think that art or music's is a way to understand the human need for gods. I think it's further evidence of religion's stealth tactics to maintain the power/position/personal wealth of its main human leaders. Just in the same way that the pope attempts to 'tickle the aesthetic pleasure centers of humans,' when he appears in all his finery with gold accents and a version of a druidic pole (a.k.a Shepards/Gandalf/Merlin's staff) with a symbol of the crucified JC stuck on the top (probably also gold).
In my opinion humans still need god due to their inherited primal fears and fear/dissatisfaction with the oblivion that science suggests occurs after death.
It may well be Jack that I have just misunderstood the main intentions or your OP and I have deflected at a (as @Agent Smith states as my tendency) tangent. :smile:

You have a point. To be a (good) philosopher embrace complexity (nuance & subtlety) was one advice/suggestion given to viewers by a youtube channel content creator, can't recall who though.

Yet from a certain vantage point, it is quite simple, oui. From another, one would have to throw up one's hands in sheer exasperation and utter frustration, going "what a hairy problem!" Novacula occami?

Look at this:



Simplicity, no? Outlines only as far as I can tell.

I do agree that art can be used as a 'threat', even to evoke fear, especially in imagery such as imagery of hell. I am not saying that representations point to a need or to an actual reality behind these. So much is human construction and interpretation.

One aspect of this is the idea of music played in reverse having a sinister aspect. One main example of this is the example of people finding the word 'Satan is God' if the Led Zepellin Song, 'Stairway to Heaven' is played backwards. Whether this was intended or simply an interpretation is questionable because any song which has the word dog in it is God back to front.

I hope this example is not too obscure in response to yours because sometimes I go into a flight of ideas. It may be that in some ways there is a need for belief in God or a spiritual dimension, as Jung argued in, 'Modern Man in Search for Soul'.However, it may be that the idea of God can become toxic or unhelpful. It could be asked where this will go in the future? Will human beings outgrow the need for God and religion or will this exist as long as human beings exist?

So much is human construction and interpretation. — Jack Cummins

For me this is vital to understanding the good and bad aspects of what the human storytelling tradition has brought us to. From the first moment, our ancient ancestors told the first story about the big shiny that moved across the sky and how they once saw it fight against the shadow which tried to eat it and how the shiny won the fight in the end and how it chases away the dark and warms us etc.
From here to the god posit seems a very small step. So-called 'Chinese whispers' will do the rest to go from theism to doctrinal religion. It's very basic 'human construction and interpretation,' art and music are just ways to embellish the storytelling.

What do you think of the following two suggestions, one is pure conjecture and completely from 'human interpretation.' and the other is based on 10 years of research by the author of 'Caesars Messiah,' Joe Atwill.

If you do bad things, you don't answer to god, you answer to satan. It is satan who administers your punishment not god. Satan is therefore not an enemy of god. It is gods enforcer, it works with god to punish transgressors.

In Greek the name 'Mary' means 'sea of bitterness or rebellious female'. Atwill suggests that based on his research, the name was used by Roman soldiers for any female relatives or wives of male Jewish rebels, in the same way that, nancy was used to refer to homosexual males or 'butch' for homosexual females or 'Sheila' for any Australian female etc. The gospels are written in Greek and that's is why so many of the female characters in the gospels are called Mary.

I am not suggesting that these two suggestions above are true and cannot be refuted. I am just demonstrating my agreement with your comment regarding 'human construction and interpretation.'

A female partner-deity of God would probably align with our conception of the ideal woman (beauty with brains, a good soul). Note for some men, beauty is all they want, the rest of a woman's qualities like intelligence and scruples are either unwanted or treated as bonuses.

Yahweh's consort/Goddess: Omniscient (science) + Omniaesthetic (art) + Omnibenevolent (ethics).

Perhaps our fascination with art (beauty), which is to a fault, is a sign that we yearn for a female deity, the Goddess who sits next to God.

In a way, your description of the female partner of God corresponds with the muses as a source of inspiration in the arts. There is s strong connection between what is projected onto other people and what onto God. In mysticism and the metaphysical poets there was a blending of the idea of love of a human partner and God, or the Goddess. So, yes the quest for a female deity and lover are connected.

Jung also spoke of Sophia, or Wisdom, as the feminine principle, important in balance. The Gnostic Gospels also pay attention to such symbolic connections, with the suggestion of Mary Magdalene as Jesus's lover.

I think that the idea of Satan as being the accuser or punisher makes a lot of sense, and this is a way of seeing the symbolic significance of the God vs Satan relationship, rather than the historical idea of good and evil in a battle against one another.

Your suggestion of Mary meaning a rebellious female is something which I was not aware of. That is because in the representation of the idea of Mary which I came across the concept of Mary is often of someone who is obedient to God, and pure in the sense of being a Virgin, or the idealised image of motherhood.

Perhaps our fascination with art (beauty), which is to a fault, is a sign that we yearn for a female deity — Agent Smith

Does that "we" include women?

:ok: The muses, if memory serves, were females, the source of artistic inspiration, oui? Thanks for reminding me of that. I owe you one!

As per Wikipedia, there are 3 muses

1. Aoide ("song" or "tune") which I intepret as innate talent.

2. Melete ("practice" or "occasion") which is praxis, a must.

3. Mneme ("memory"), one must recall the "song" and what was all that practising?.

Generally, if any of the muses ditch you (see what they're doing there?), your aspirations to produce great works of art are not going to be fulfilled; you'll just be like the rest of us, wannabe thises and wannabe thatses.



One question (aside): Why is it that when something good happens, it's because of team work, and when something bad happens, it's because of a proverbial bad apple, an individual?

Is it right to claim a handful of artists and intellectuals as a collective human achievement while singling out the Jeffrey Dahmers, Ted Bundies and Hitlers as outliers, anomalies?

It doesn't add up, oui?

I wonder if the Voyager Golden Record contains information on psychopaths, wars, and other atrocious acts humans have commited since the dawn of "civilization"? Reminds me of the Mantis Orchid! :fear:

Does that "we" include women? — Noble Dust

Women + men. A role model for the former, an object of desire for the latter.

Perhaps our fascination with art (beauty), which is to a fault, is a sign that we yearn for a female deity, the Goddess who sits next to God. — Agent Smith

Which is just so........human, isn't it.

Your suggestion of Mary meaning a rebellious female is something which I was not aware of. That is because in the representation of the idea of Mary which I came across the concept of Mary is often of someone who is obedient to God, and pure in the sense of being a Virgin, or the idealised image of motherhood. — Jack Cummins

Atwill suggests that your imagery of the 'Mary's' was what the real authors of the gospels intended, whilst hiding the truth behind the stories in the gospels, that they were in fact satirical parodies of the real rebel Jewish leaders who fought so continuously against Rome. He suggests all the characters in the new testament are satirical inventions, including JC.

Which is just so........human, isn't it. — universeness

Human, si!

Human, si! — Agent Smith

Does that "we" include women? — Noble Dust

Well, I think theistic women do want to see themselves fully represented right beside god, behind every great god there has to be a great goddess. I am sure this was a missed line in:

Well I did mention that God is the perfect man, feels like it was women who came up with god as the strong, brainy, kind-hearted gentleman! Men wouldn't do anything to sell themselves short like that, oui? As it is the competition is already a do or die kind; isn't that why love and war are equivalent in terms of fairness (all is fair in love and war) which is another way of saying fairness is not really a priority in these matters. Anything goes, no-holds-barred, free-for-all, if there is a law, it's the law of the jungle; aut nec aut necare!

Anything goes, no-holds-barred, free-for-all, if there is a law, it's the law of the jungle — Agent Smith

Yeah but most of us now advocate for much more civilised behavior than was required under the Darwinian laws of the jungle. In fact, more and more people insist on it.

Yeah but most of us now advocate for much more civilised behavior than was required under the Darwinian laws of the jungle. In fact, more and more people insist on it — universeness

I'll take your word for it.

I'll take your word for it. — Agent Smith

Please do, but I don't think I am, as Barry Manilow starts off with 'One voice singing in the darkness.'
I think the number of global voices are growing and growing, all demanding a better life for all and better stewardship of our planet. Join our voices Agent Smith. The bigger the throng the better, perhaps we can finally install adequate global checks and balances to prevent nefarious ba****** from ever gaining significant power anywhere on our planet.

The idea of all the characters in the Bible being satirical is interesting. That is because so many of the themes such as the Virgin birth and resurrection seem to related to themes of mythology. Also the Gospels were written such a long time after Jesus, so it is hard to know about whoever or whatever the life of Jesus was constructed upon. I am inclined to think that there must have been some aspects of real life, probably related to the way it was taught as literal to me in childhood. However, when the Gnostic Gospels are seen as well as the ones in the Bible it becomes more open to question.

Well, I don't want to add to the burden of your reading list Jack, :smile: but I would highly recommend Joe Atwill's 'Caesars Messiah'. I found it fascinating and compelling but after listening to its main dissenters, especially atheist academics such as Dr Richard Carrier, I have currently settled at around the 66.7% mark, as a measure of how convinced I am that Joe Atwill is correct on the majority of his findings.

It sounds worth reading and I may try and get hold of it. I am simply trying to read some of the ones queuing up in piles in my room. If I get too many more at present I will be in danger of becoming buried alive amidst books. That would be a philosophy tale in itself.

:smile: Aint it the truth!

@Jack Cummins

Leonardo da Vinci! He was a painter par excellence and also dabbled in science & engineering (Vitruvian man, designed a helo).

As far as I am aware Leonardo da Vinci was far ahead of his time in many aspects of thought. Some of the greater thinkers have gone beyond the scope of rigid divisions. This applies to Freud and Jung, who I find extremely interesting, but I am sure it applies to many others too. I am inclined to view the in between areas and edges, drawing upon models of science and the metaphors and imagery of the art offer scope for creative ways of seeing. They are like the wasteland of philosophy, the deserts of discovery where freedom and independence of thought may be found.

Some of the greater thinkers have gone beyond the scope of rigid divisions. This applies to Freud and Jung ... — Jack Cummins

In what sense do you consider these men "greater thinkers"? IMHO as a lifelong reader of cognitive neuroscience (& cognitive psychology), both Freud & Jung had produced provocative, even insightful, works of pseudoscience and quasi-mystical mythopoetics (mostly derived from, or influenced by, German idealists & vitalism). :chin: