It is true that art translates the laws of nature into images and language, but so does religion, philosophy, and science. Is the translation good, is it true? Some abstract religions ban visual representation of the sacred, but then they also ban material life in general, and art and truth disappear down the spiritual hole into nothingness. I believe this leads to a God that does not really exist. Yet Godhood can exist in material or supermaterial form which life can evolve to become.
This means sacred goals, sacred paths, need not disappear in radical, postmodern, Nietzschian minds. The affirmation of the sacred can continue to inspire in art. And truth can be represented by real evolving living objects in philosophy and science as well as in religion. Empty translations and empty abstractions need to fade away in this evolutionary reform. Too much has been made of the distinction between the object in itself and the object humans see, which is often the desire to prove the existence of something that does not exist. We see enough of real objects, we see most of real objects, and we will see and know more of reality when we evolve higher consciousness and higher intelligence.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment