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.

Which Way?

I have been fascinated by American Creation's blog site. They have been discussing many issues concerning our Founding as a nation.

Which way is best to understand our present reality? Realism , Critical Realsim, or Instrucmentalism?

Realism makes absolute and universal claims about what humans know, understand and value (or should value). Realism says that we perceive everything the same way. It is a correspondence view of Truth. History happened in the real world. Scientific facts are facts.

Instrumentalism understands "what works", is more pragmatic in its assessment, as it is focused on "outcome". Instrumentalism is a kind of "social contruction" about reality. The real is what leaders say is real. History is interpreted by these to assure outcomes.

Critical realism says that although reality is "out there", we cannot know it absolutely. We only know "in part", as we are within certain contexts of history, societial, and personal. This being the case, the critical realists must evaluate what he chooses to value as "ultimate". These are the "ideals" that our Founding Fathers viewed as "most important".

The Quadralateral affirms different ways of "being in the world". Some understand through reason and make their evaluations about life based on reason's assessment. But, reason is still interpreted within contexts of one's experience or expertise. We cannot get away from various contexts.

Though tradition and scripture are the interpretive lens of understanding culture, these are not absolute, either. So, those in leadership must strategize, using their reason, about what outcome is to be valued and work to formulate how policy helps to form that outcome.

The outcome today is multicultural, and global. The multiculturalists values reason within contexts, while the critical realists understands that everyone's culture, cannot be the one and only outcome, as we must choose what is of ultimate importance.

We need critical realists that will defend Western civilization from its demise.

This morning it was reported that Germany is at odds with America over a NATO attack that killed Afghan citizens. Globalism creates division where it concerns the West's interest, because the West has bought into the multicultural "worldview where the West is dismissed on the basis of "imperialism", or "colonialism". The multiculturalists tries to rectify injustice through minority rights. And the unintended consequences is reverse discrimination.

Last night, on TV it was reported how the multiculturalists are re-writing our history, and labelling the heroes of our past with derogatory names, undermining thier work in building our culture of freedom and justice.

I think that we are headed for rough waters unless reason holds sway above multiculturalism. Multiculturalism will lead us toward communism, which undermines individual liberties. And individual liberties are only won under accountable and responsible leadership, who inform the public of the outcome, instead of "winning" through sleight of hand.

What Does One Do?

My grand-daughter is here today. She is dancing and curtseying and bringing the "wonderment" that is a part of childhood. I wonder how she will grow and develop, as she is so "smart", at the tender age of two. She dreams and makes up stories. She shares her heart and she believes that eveything is good and nice and to be trusted. What happens when she realizes that life doesn't work that way?

How do you protect the innocence, and yet prepare them for the real world? What if she is meant to create like this all her life and she is maladjusted for the rest of her life like many creative spirits? I don't know how to protect, if I should or even, if I can.

Even though I saw this aspect in my children and delighted in seeing their creative spirit, I didn't appreciate it like I do my grand-daughter's today. Perhaps, because I have grown "more realistic" (although, I do believe I'm more creative than not...so therefore may never grow up in certain ways...)...now, I have come to realize that life "happens" and that sometimes even though leaders attempt to "make things happen", certain things are beyond their control or knowledge.

Hannah Reece is my grand-daughter's name, and I hope that she gives to life as much as she given to ours, these short two years she has lived.