I used myself as an example merely as an object of contrast - I know myself better than I know anyone else. I personally find the totality of intellect, emotion and spirituality a very fulfilling worldview. While I am sure I have contradictory elements, I try to align my worldview with my practice - and I do not find contradiction in my convictions.I certainly do not disagree that there are atheists that do not reject the practice of agape love and other spiritual elements, such as beauty and art. I am just curious as to how one rationalizes the origination of these elements in their being and worldview.
So: I posit that the experience of beauty, the transcendent and spirituality is unexplainable by the atheistic worldview - particularly that branch of atheism that is materialist and naturalistic - explaining the experiences in terms of biochemical reactivness is non-satisfactory in that is merely the mechanism of experience - not the origination of the experience.
Quote:I would propose that there is no correlation between the most talented artists and their relation to morality - while what is defined as the most popular traits among artists by the world is merely a reflection of culture as opposed to being an indicator of God/godlessness.Our nature is to grasp for equality with God, so we diminish the things of God from our popular art to position ourselves as the root of creation, particularly as we rationalize away the Creator. Easily evidentiated by investigation of art history.
Originally Posted by funinspace
We are thinking beings, even by evolutionist terms. Why is creativity, simply for the sake of creating beauty, a construct that should be alien if there is no God(s)? And if there is a God(s), then why do some of the most talented artists usually seam to have significant problems within societies notions of morals? I see this as far easier to rationalize than the various notions of God existing.