The Human Person as a Work of Art

Humans differ as to their interests and choices of value. This is important to affirm and uphold in free societies, even when we disagree, as humans are not to be cloned representations of their parents, mentors, or voluntary associations. The human person is more than the sum of his/her parts. It is called irreducible complexity. And those that want to mandate a moral realism that perverts the human ability to "be in the world" as an autonomous moral agent is deluded about their right to power.

I got to thinking about realism itself, because of another blog site on Moral Ontology by Richard Carrier. Art is understood in philosophical terms such as realism, surrealism, or impressionism.

A realist painter paints a picture that is representative of reality. There is no question about the painting and what it is. Realism is a correspondence theory of understanding "truth claims".  Such a view of "Truth" is understood as absolute, because of its direct correspondence to "the real". Such thinking is what underlies traditional understanding of theology. Everything that "is", is directly underpinned by "God", even history itself.

But, there are other art forms that are just as beautiful that express their time. Impressionism comes to mind. Impressionistic paintors paint without defined lines, but still have a  "sense of" reality or of objective form. It is more intuitive painting, as it is romantic. I love Von Gogh and French impressionists, like Delacroix. These paintors would be more Transcendental in their understanding of 'truth", as truth is worked into reality, but not a direct representation. Such writers as Emerson, and Whitman come to mind, especially Emerson's "Over-soul" and Whitman's "Leaves of Grass". Romanticism has  influenced American culture through the "Story" as Real. Our myth is the American Dream, where everyone has opportunity and all are 'equal before the law'.

There is also the surrealist paintors like Salvador Dali. I love his work because of the many meanings that can be read into his paintings. Surrealists  have post-conventional ways of expressing their art. Their art is an expression about representations in conventional society that have hindered or slighted the "whole picture". Their attempt to express anti-traidtional values, or the minority "vision" have left the traditionalists uncomfortable.

I think humans should be free to interpret their reality. Therefore, I wouldn't be a legalist, but I think that the laws of our country should protect all expressions of life that do not usurp the basic foundations of society. And I think this is what we argue in the cultural wars. Laws should be like impressionism, defined where they are seen and understood, but not defined by "rude lines" in the sand. Such is Islamic religious culture. Human experience does not lend itself well to such views of justice.

Humans should be autonomous moral agents that can choose their associations by their frames of understading and their identification factors. There shouldn't be discrimination of those that don't hold the majority's opinions, but neither should there be special priviledge for them, either.

Art in its many forms has brought untold blesshing to man's life, as it allows creativity of expression for the individual artist and it allows culture to evolve, seeks to bring all humans 'under one roof" of the human experience/condition and makes society more of an "open" society.

Relgion because of its need to define "God" in theologial language comes short of describing the indescribalble. The huamnities benefit all men because they speaks beyond words to the heart, at least for those that are open. Religous climates have been known to oppress certain expressions of art because of the fear that art would be offensive to "God". What should be understood is how art has enhanced man's ability to appreciate the beauty of human experience, even the common ones, even the tragic ones teach us. Journalism, art in it many forms, writing, communication arts can all be means of grasping and grappling with the human condition. Beauty can be grasped through a "human message", or a "human idea", or a "human value", which all underwrite the human experience!

Humans are works of art, whether one believes that natural processes or "God" created human persons in their complexity. Humans should be allowed to advance their art form in a free and open society.

RE-Review on "Inception"

I have to continue my analysis of "Inception", because of what I left out. The "anti-realist" view of "Inception" is a "thought experiment". Ideas breed thoughts that "bloom" in the mind. And my mind "blooms" many thoughts :)!

The main character's father had been the initiator of the "anti-realist" position to his son. But, he had found that his son had become "stuck" over the guilt and responsibility of his wife's mental instability and resulting suicide. The father pleaded for his son to leave "this world", a created one, and come to the "real world" where sanity could be restored. When the effort failed, the father introduced his son to a bright and promising student. This student was to continue the "tradition" of "creating worlds"....

The student soon became aware that there was a hinderance on the part of her mentor. The teacher was stuck and she sought to find out what had hindered him in his ability to "enter" the world of the other without interference of his own "baggage". The student's own journey could not be continued without letting the teacher go, as he had to work through his own issues. The impact on the real world of "his creation" could not be recognized or acknowledged, as he became obessessed with getting back to his children and the real world that they lived in. His fear of separation from them had led him to his bondage and he punished himself by creating the prison of his own mind. 

This is the real world of "self punitive" behavior when one has not forgiven oneself for past indiscretions. Acknowledgment of one's limitations and failures is part of maturing and coming to terms with reality, which is what the "old man" represented in the end.

Humans have a great capacity to deny their "real worlds" for the "worlds" they create and inhabit. These "worlds" are walls of prisions that won't surrender their victims until the victim takes the responsibility without demanding perfection of himself. The "ideal" hinders growth, liberty and an ability to embrace life with its complexity, joys, sorrows, fears, hopes and dreams. These realities are what life is made of and for. Without entering life, there is no hope for entering another's life, not really, because life will always be about accomplishment, success, or perfection which hinders the ability to see, understand and grasp the real world of another life.

Oops! Wittgenstein, not Kant

Correction! Wittgenstein was the anti-realist....Kant was the moral idealist...wouldn't Jesus life be understood by Kant as the "ideal", whereas, Wittgenstein would understand Jesus life as a "way of life"based on one's understanding of value, meaning, context, which is a cultural language....etc...