[Serious] The Humanities

[possibletarian]

I don’t follow how religion is necessary for human beings to have values or feel sympathy. Life, on its own, should be more than enough.

Me neither,

Just because the majority are religious does not mean values which give people morals, valued emotions and lifestyles does not mean they are a product of religion, in fact i would say it's the other way around, religion was used as a means to give them authority.

[Belacqua]

I don’t follow how religion is necessary for human beings to have values or feel sympathy. Life, on its own, should be more than enough.

Me neither,

Just because the majority are religious does not mean values which give people morals, valued emotions and lifestyles does not mean they are a product of religion, in fact i would say it's the other way around, religion was used as a means to give them authority.

If someone were to argue, on another thread, that religion is necessary for those good things, I hope you would argue against him.

On this thread the topic is different. The topic here is that since religion is NOT necessary for those good things, but has been involved with them for a long time, what are the best non-religious tools for us to talk about values and the good life? I think that the answer may be: the humanities.

[Fake Messiah]

what are the best non-religious tools for us to talk about values and the good life?

They don't have to be best or good. For instance MPAA rating systems seem to take over what pulpits were once, so now people go to the movies to see what is appropriate and what is not.

[LadyForCamus]

Sure...okay. But, need it be Bach for me to be Sufficiently Moved by a melody? Need it be Twelve Angry Men or It’s a Wonderful Life to have the pillars of our human condition be stirred? I don’t think we should leave our values, and what should move our spirit, up to some small group of humanitarian “elites”. Some of the brightest creative minds killed themselves or drank themselves to death because they were so unhappy. It should be a collective effort. Regina Spektor’s song about a single mom of four who is dying of cancer moves me to tears, even though she won’t be in any history books. Watching It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia not only makes me belly laugh and appreciate being alive, but also reminds me of the mundane and collective self-serving cruelty people are capable of, though they likely won’t be remembered in fifty or a hundred years. I wept throughout the entire final installment of Stephen King’s the Dark Tower, but I’m sure they won’t be teaching it in any high school English classes. The human experience is what unites us. It’s what we can all relate to. Empathy, and a deep-seated, geneticsll driven instinct to care about the well-being of others. Just my two cents.

Thank you for finally getting us back to the OP! It's annoying that every thread has to start with barking dogs who attack me for saying things I've never said.

About the examples you give: I would never scold anybody for enjoying the books or movies they enjoy. I'm in no way against pleasure. 

However I agree with the quote in the OP that cultural productions are not a fully-equal smorgasbord and if I like one thing and you like another there is nothing to it but personal taste. I do think that someone who has a complete command of Shakespeare's plays has accomplished something qualitatively better than someone who knows everything there is to know about the "Marvel Cinematic Universe." 

And the reasons for this have to do with the role that the arts play in the place of religion. High quality stuff is high quality because it enriches life. It increases our knowledge of the world, exposes us to ourselves, demands our humility and skepticism, and makes us more empathetic to people unlike ourselves. Can I prove that these are positive qualities? Not empirically, no. But I still disagree with someone who says that the opposites are just as good. 

Bad art will flatter us, push our contradictions out of sight, tell us that we are the best, and that how we do things demands no scrutiny. I think that once we learn how to spot these traits, a lot of what seems cool becomes a lot less enjoyable. 

The extreme measures that readers of the Bible went to in past times has given us a legacy of subtle hermeneutics. Writers like Proust have a greater range of expression than more simple Aesop's Fables-type stories. Well-informed readers are sensitive to the narrative techniques and the various experiences these give us. (This is not just me; I'm paraphrasing Derrida.) 

As an example: I grew up watching Kirk and Spock go through their weekly morality plays. To a kid, it seemed deep, and I don't regret watching those things. When I tried to watch the most recent Star Trek series, however, the ideological subtext was so horrible that I had to give up after two episodes. We are supposed to be cheered by the fact that the Star Trek world has great diversity of peoples -- black people and Asians and aliens all serving together. But this diversity is expressed because each type of person puts on the uniform of the quasi-military organization and has a chance to obey the Benign Captain. And what is the story about? Our hero starts a war that, although we don't really want it, we know we have to go through with because it is our moral duty. We are the good people and we will fight if we must. In other words, it's good old American values -- violence and power -- projected into the future and made tolerable because it's now a young person of color who starts the war. A viewer who watches unquestioningly will come away stupider and more accepting of America's tradition of solving conflicts through violence.

I take your point. I’d be lying if I said I’ve never secretly judged the people who tell me their favorite show is The Bachelor, or Real Housewives. I’ve definitely thought, “don’t you want more for yourself?” But, what values has religion bestowed upon society with its overarching command? I notice obedience, fear of the unknown, discouragement of intellectual curiosity and questioning of authority, self hatred, and sexual shame to name a few. I’d say religion has utterly failed to lift us up to our full potential. I’d say we’ve lifted ourselves up in spite of the primitive and barbaric ideals pushed upon us by Christianity, which to me, describes a very shallow and hollowed out interpretation of the human experience. So, if we’ve thrived despite religion, were the humanities the driving force? I’ll never attempt to undermine the value of the arts. But, good art imitates life, right? Does knowing and understanding good art inform our values, and What Is Good? Or, is truly good art the expression of an intimate and nuanced understanding of values we innately possess? Perhaps, simply the shared human experience, for better or worse, drives those things?

[Belacqua]

what are the best non-religious tools for us to talk about values and the good life?

They don't have to be best or good. For instance MPAA rating systems seem to take over what pulpits were once,  so now people go to the movies to see what is appropriate and what is not.

The MPAA is a trade organization whose members are for-profit corporations. One of their jobs is to rank the ages appropriate for movies, but overall the goal is to enrich the member corporations. In my opinion, media corporations are not reliable sources for information about morality, values, and the good life. 

For example, the movie Captain Marvel was rated PG-13. That means there are no bare boobs, few swear words, and the violence is not overly realistic. So the media conglomerates say it's OK for young teens. 

As you know, that movie was made with the assistance and cooperation of the US military. It shows the military in the best possible light, making soldiers and pilots into great heroes. As always, the good people in the story are the ones who make the most effective use of violence. We are reminded that violence solves problems and that the military is wonderful. 

Captain Marvel contains the more advanced message that women are empowered through their ability to solve problems through violence even more effectively than men. This is what counts as progress in America. 

If you think the MPAA cares at all about the questionable moral ground of those messages, I think you are mistaken.

[The Grand Nudger]

Its pointless to talk about how so and so religion "supplies a vocabulary", for anything..let alone to spiral out from there. Mainly because we supply that religion with the vocabulary in the first place. It doesn't have to be a religion, ofc, it could be anything. Whatever the unifying construct of any given culture happens to be, is how people from that culture express themselves.

You seem to think that there's some choice to be made between religious value and "marketplace" value, but religious value was a "marketplace" value to begin with.

We can spend as many pages as you like bitching about what we don't like - sure - but remember that society doesn't give a shit what you don't like, or how much you pine for some other time, or some other art, or some other system, or some other vocabulary, or some other construct. Sure, our art and culture rest on questionable values, but people like it, and that's exactly how the questionable art, values, and culture of christianity came to be as well. We're going to keep doing this...reinventing ourselves from time to time. Every time we do someone swears it's the end of this or that, but it never is.

My vote, for the best way to talk about values and the good life. Words. Same as ever. Same thing christians used, same thing that the pagans before them used. Same thing that the animists before them used.

[Fake Messiah]

If you think the MPAA cares at all about the questionable moral ground of those messages, I think you are mistaken.

I don't, that's why I wrote "They don't have to be best or good" especially since they are a continuation of the Catholic Legion of Decency, but it is how it is. If people see a topless woman on the street they know it's a bad thing because It's not be PG-13, but if they see a topless man on the street they know it's not bad and it's PG-13.

[Belacqua]

what values has religion bestowed upon society with its overarching command? I notice obedience, fear of the unknown, discouragement of intellectual curiosity and questioning of authority, self hatred, and sexual shame to name a few.

This is interesting to me. I suppose it's taken for granted on a forum like this that these are the essential characteristics of any religion, and that this is what religious people get from their beliefs. 

This contrasts, I think, with what you write after:

Or, is truly good art the expression of an intimate and nuanced understanding of values we innately possess? Perhaps, simply the shared human experience, for better or worse, drives those things?

I don't think we just know what a shared human experience is like. So I agree with you that at least one of art's functions is to allow us to feel this. In fact I think we are fairly unaware of a lot of things that are going on in ourselves, much less in other people, and that art brings these things to light, or gives them "a local habitation and a name," so that we can think more clearly about them. 

And one of the things that has been part of human experience is the positive value of religious experience. Though you and I may lack this, it has clearly been important for vast numbers of people. (I suspect that there will be people on this forum willing to pipe up and say that it has always been fake, or the result of fear, but I think we can take people's accounts as accurate, and not dismiss them based on mind reading.) 

I was raised without religion, but I have been fortunate to get some sense of a shared religious experience through the arts. Have you read I Promessi Sposi by Manzoni? Truly a great novel about the varieties of religious experience -- good and bad -- in the 17th century. Every Italian person knows it, so I don't know why it's not famous here. I know of no other book about what it is like to live in a society completely soaked in the Catholic religion. The results of religion in this book are not entirely like the list you describe. 

Dante describes the achievement of merging with bliss, and the enormous sense of peace that derives from his religion. He is famous for saying, "all my thoughts turn toward love," which, given the Platonic and otherworldly origins of love that he believes in, is entirely a religious feeling. Blake lived every day in a religious ecstasy which he used to develop a beautiful Christian worldview, anticipating Kant and Jung, among others. 

Whether "good art imitates life" or not is an ongoing debate. I guess it depends on what we mean by "imitate." Zeuxis couldn't find a living model beautiful enough to pose for his Aphrodite, so he looked at a few dozen and chose the best features from each. Is this imitation? Surely it's not ONLY imitation. 

I wonder about your experiences with art... Have you been in the presence of something extremely beautiful and thought, "Oh, this is what religious people are talking about." There's a temple in Kyoto that I go to every time I'm in the neighborhood, with a gigantic gilded statue of Amida Nyorai, and the most wonderful otherworldly atmosphere. If it's quiet and there aren't any squalling school groups, this gives a sense of what real believers must experience, I think. For them, it is more than an aesthetic surge. I don't believe in Amida Nyorai, but this experience allows me to share something with people who do.

[The Grand Nudger]

Some of us get that by standing at the bank of a creek, lol. Irreligious people have the same experiences that religious people do. You're probably even imagining something there for them that isn't.

You think that they feel what you feel, plus...but it might just be what you feel. When we discuss experience, we're talking about human chemistry - not a temple, or a rock..or even a creek. Any of those things could be the location of just such an experience..and by the breadth of human experience - and even human religious experience, we can say for certain that pretty much every place on earth does create them.

I guarantee you that there are people who feel the sense of the numinous...in a walmart parking lot.

[LadyForCamus]

what values has religion bestowed upon society with its overarching command? I notice obedience, fear of the unknown, discouragement of intellectual curiosity and questioning of authority, self hatred, and sexual shame to name a few.

This is interesting to me. I suppose it's taken for granted on a forum like this that these are the essential characteristics of any religion, and that this is what religious people get from their beliefs.

As far as I can tell, those are the values Christianity attempts to instill into its followers, and I think there is ample evidential support for that assertion. That being said, I understand that not everyone gets the same things out of their religion; not everyone interprets those values identically. That could be a topic of its own, IMO. 

This contrasts, I think, with what you write after:

Or, is truly good art the expression of an intimate and nuanced understanding of values we innately possess? Perhaps, simply the shared human experience, for better or worse, drives those things?

Is Christianity “truly good art”? Meh. It’s a pretty good con job. I don’t know if I’d call it art in the sense that it deserves reverence.

I don't think we just know what a shared human experience is like. So I agree with you that at least one of art's functions is to allow us to feel this. In fact I think we are fairly unaware of a lot of things that are going on in ourselves, much less in other people, and that art brings these things to light, or gives them "a local habitation and a name," so that we can think more clearly about them.

Well, if we’re speaking about values, artists are inspired by what matters to them. They must have some sense of what they care about, and a desire to express that ardor, before it can be expressed in the form of an artistic work. 

And one of the things that has been part of human experience is the positive value of religious experience.

Is there any way to quantify this? How do we know that the relationship between people and religion is a net positive one? Should we disqualify those who worship out of fear, or who spend their days in guilt and turmoil for being a sinner? Or, people who live in anger and bitterness; who hate their god for taking away their loved one? 

Though you and I may lack this, it has clearly been important for vast numbers of people. (I suspect that there will be people on this forum willing to pipe up and say that it has always been fake, or the result of fear, but I think we can take people's accounts as accurate, and not dismiss them based on mind reading.)

Sure. I won’t dispute that religious belief has been comforting for many, many people. 

I was raised without religion, but I have been fortunate to get some sense of a shared religious experience through the arts. Have you read I Promessi Sposi by Manzoni? Truly a great novel about the varieties of religious experience -- good and bad -- in the 17th century. Every Italian person knows it, so I don't know why it's not famous here. I know of no other book about what it is like to live in a society completely soaked in the Catholic religion. The results of religion in this book are not entirely like the list you describe.

I’ve not heard of it, no. And, I’m 50% Sicilian! Shame on me! 

Dante describes the achievement of merging with bliss, and the enormous sense of peace that derives from his religion. He is famous for saying, "all my thoughts turn toward love," which, given the Platonic and otherworldly origins of love that he believes in, is entirely a religious feeling. Blake lived every day in a religious ecstasy which he used to develop a beautiful Christian worldview, anticipating Kant and Jung, among others. 

Whether "good art imitates life" or not is an ongoing debate. I guess it depends on what we mean by "imitate." Zeuxis couldn't find a living model beautiful enough to pose for his Aphrodite, so he looked at a few dozen and chose the best features from each. Is this imitation? Surely it's not ONLY imitation. 

I wonder about your experiences with art... Have you been in the presence of something extremely beautiful and thought, "Oh, this is what religious people are talking about."

Sure, listening to certain music or reading a fine poem I have thought, “if there was a god, it would feel like this. But, I didn’t need a god to feel it. I was simply moved. When people
create art, they’re trying to connect with people. They’re trying to communicate something that is important, of value to them. They’re wanting to move you by crafting something out of what is moving them. I think you have to care about something first, before you make art about it. Not the other way around. 

 There's a temple in Kyoto that I go to every time I'm in the neighborhood, with a gigantic gilded statue of Amida Nyorai, and the most wonderful otherworldly atmosphere. If it's quiet and there aren't any squalling school groups, this gives a sense of what real believers must experience, I think. For them, it is more than an aesthetic surge. I don't believe in Amida Nyorai, but this experience allows me to share something with people who do.

If the statue wasn’t based on a religious figure, would you be as powerfully moved by it? Would the art alone be enough, or does imagining what it must feel like for a believer to experience that statue add something unique to your own experience of it?