Transforming Religion and Art

It seems obvious that economic problems move into political, philosophical, artistic, and finally religious problems. In this way “beauty” has aesthetic and moral dimensions, not one minus the other. Modern art went the other way, rejecting the moral dimension in art, regarding it as mere censorship.

Plato thought the moral dimension was virtually all in regarding economic, political, philosophical, artistic, and religious principles. In Plato's moral dimension the highest Idea, or Form was free of all material or even supermaterial attributes. I do not believe this is the zenith of reality, this was free of all reality, and Plato needs a trans-valuation.

The material world evolves to Godhood. This grounded evaluation brings a deeply conservative and a transformed view of art and religion. Admittedly this means believing in the value of “things not seen,” which leaves us open to the charge of idealism, or faith, but this time around the zenith of things is defined in the evolving, material and supermaterial world.

Defining the highest beauty, truth and goodness remains an evolving, working definition because we will not fully know Godhood until we evolve in the material and supermaterial world to Godhood. Beauty, like Godhood, is not untethered from the material world.

Philosophers and scientists, like poets, can also operate under divine inspiration, but it is inspiration grounded in the material activation within life, defined here as the Spirit-Will-To-Godhood, activating life to evolve toward supermaterial Godhood, balancing with natural selection. This material translation of Godhood, opposite Plato, helps define the highest beauty, truth, goodness, and reality.