(May 31, 2012 at 7:50 am)StatCrux Wrote: The subject of the painting doesn't need to be religious, the mind of the artist remains religious in its way of understanding reality. In the same way a monk cleaning his cell is continuously in union with God, his life becomes continual prayer, so the mindset of the artist doesn't stop being religious if they paint a non religious subject.
You appear to be begging the question/circular argument on this one.
You're claiming that the artist creates great art because he is inspired by religion. He is inspired by religion, because he paints great art.
You haven't quantified this statement, merely asserted it.
I used Da Vinci for a very good reason, because the faith attributed to him is Roman Catholic, yet his views, whilst occasionally referencing a God, were distinctly heretical in nature, and most certainly focused on "an empirical approach to every thought, opinion, and action and accepted no truth unless verified or verifiable, whether related to natural phenomena, human behavior, or social activities."*
Sounds more like an empirical viewpoint rather than a transcendental one to me.
*Source: Leonardo - Marco Rosci (1976)
Self-authenticating private evidence is useless, because it is indistinguishable from the illusion of it. ― Kel, Kelosophy Blog
If you’re going to watch tele, you should watch Scooby Doo. That show was so cool because every time there’s a church with a ghoul, or a ghost in a school. They looked beneath the mask and what was inside?
The f**king janitor or the dude who runs the waterslide. Throughout history every mystery. Ever solved has turned out to be. Not Magic. ― Tim Minchin, Storm
If you’re going to watch tele, you should watch Scooby Doo. That show was so cool because every time there’s a church with a ghoul, or a ghost in a school. They looked beneath the mask and what was inside?
The f**king janitor or the dude who runs the waterslide. Throughout history every mystery. Ever solved has turned out to be. Not Magic. ― Tim Minchin, Storm
