Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

TwoShanks · Oct 22, 2003, 10:29 pm

I would argue against the idea that art is everything, but since that is self-evidently absurd I won't bother.

I would suggest that soft atheism is the most rational religious viewpoint.

RebelWithanAK · Oct 22, 2003, 10:55 pm

I'd like to see you live without art.

TwoShanks · Oct 22, 2003, 10:57 pm

I can't live without air, but I don't think air is everything. How is art a religion anyway?

eXploiTeD · Oct 22, 2003, 11:02 pm

... It is quite obvious that Water, in all of its liquid glory, is the One True Religion.

RebelWithanAK · Oct 22, 2003, 11:35 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (TwoShanks,)
I can't live without air, but I don't think air is everything. How is art a religion anyway?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
How is it not?

TwoShanks · Oct 22, 2003, 11:46 pm

From the Merriam-Webster online dictionary:

Main Entry: re·li·gion
Pronunciation: ri-'li-j&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English religioun, from Latin religion-, religio supernatural constraint, sanction, religious practice, perhaps from religare to restrain, tie back -- more at RELY
Date: 13th century
1 a : the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion> b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : CONSCIENTIOUSNESS
4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith
- re·li·gion·less adjective

I fear that art does not come under these definitions.

Perhaps you could explain to me why you think art is a religion? Or even what you think the word "religion" means?

eXploiTeD · Oct 22, 2003, 11:48 pm

Than what of fecal matter? And lustful yearnings of pedophiles? Since, by your definition, a religion can be considered legitimate if it cannot be disproven, by extension, both of these things can properly be considered religious doctrines or tools.

RebelWithanAK · Oct 22, 2003, 11:56 pm

According to your definition (well, the part that didn't use the word "religion" in describing itself), the only verifiable markers are: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith.

Art follows pretty much all that. Its entire meaning, if it has any, is that which the observer gives it. How more perfect a system of belief can you get?

TwoShanks · Oct 23, 2003, 12:01 am

And what is the "cause, principle or system of belief" that you hold with ardor and faith in relation to art? Is there some kind of special art belief system that nobody told me about? In what do you place your faith in relation to art?

eXploiTeD · Oct 23, 2003, 12:01 am

Interesting... Okay, so, what does Art have to say in regards to achieving happiness? And what of moral behaviour?

RebelWithanAK · Oct 23, 2003, 12:26 am

What does Christianity say about achieving happiness? Not a damned lot.

Twoshanks, art is emotional and it isn't. It's puritanical and it isn't. It's all-enveloping and entirely unnecessary. And you still can't live without it. You choose to believe in it what you will, however much you will. It's art. It's superfluous, and yet it feels right. This is half tongue-in-cheek, and yet it's certainly got a lot more for it than the big three...

eXploiTeD · Oct 23, 2003, 12:36 am

I'd agree, Christianity doesn't say alot. But Buddhism does, considering its major premise is that all life is suffering and in order to escape that suffering, one must... You get the idea. Most religions say alot about happiness, actually.

RebelWithanAK · Oct 23, 2003, 12:41 am

That's not happiness, that's contentment. There's a difference.

eXploiTeD · Oct 23, 2003, 01:05 am

I disagree, but we'll assume your right. Does that in some way make your statement that 'art is a religion' any less pseudo-intellectual in its nature?

RebelWithanAK · Oct 23, 2003, 01:06 am

That's assuming religion is intellectual.

eXploiTeD · Oct 23, 2003, 01:11 am

...Actually, its assuming that you are a pseudo-intellectual. But its more of a conclusion than an assumption. Nonetheless.

RebelWithanAK · Oct 23, 2003, 11:22 am

To tell you the truth, I'd rather talk about anything to get the topic off wicca and neo-paganism. I'm tired of comfortable yuppies talk about new-agey crap religions like they were trading cards. Spirituality will come to you when you need it, not because you think it fashionable at the time.

That, and you appear to be having trouble contradicting my art claim. =p

G. Adams · Oct 23, 2003, 05:27 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (RebelWithanAK,)
To tell you the truth, I'd rather talk about anything to get the topic off wicca and neo-paganism. I'm tired of comfortable yuppies talk about new-agey crap religions like they were trading cards. Spirituality will come to you when you need it, not because you think it fashionable at the time.

That, and you appear to be having trouble contradicting my art claim. =p<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

I am not a damned yuppy, i'm a post-materialist without further refinement of my definition.

And he mentioned he didn't know a whole lost about it so I said what I knew.

And you've talked a lot more about art being a religion than there is on neo-paganism.

And its not a fashion thing either, whether it is in fashion or not. Its a rejection of authoritarian religions and a glorification of the spiritual self.

So there :P

G. Adams · Oct 23, 2003, 05:28 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (RebelWithanAK,)
That's not happiness, that's contentment. There's a difference.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Ending suffering isn't in itself happiness, but ending suffering is part of enlightenment, which is internal happiness. And that is the only permanent happiness, as all physical joys fade with time, and their fading is itself a cause of suffering.

RebelWithanAK · Oct 23, 2003, 05:40 pm

Semantics, semantics, semantics.

Oct 22, 2003, 10:55 pm	#22 (permalink) (top)
RebelWithanAK Igneous Magma Location: New York City Posts: 739	I'd like to see you live without art. . . . whenever any government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such forms as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Oct 22, 2003, 11:35 pm	#25 (permalink) (top)
RebelWithanAK Igneous Magma Location: New York City Posts: 739	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (TwoShanks,) I can't live without air, but I don't think air is everything. How is art a religion anyway?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> How is it not? . . . whenever any government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such forms as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Oct 22, 2003, 11:56 pm	#28 (permalink) (top)
RebelWithanAK Igneous Magma Location: New York City Posts: 739	According to your definition (well, the part that didn't use the word "religion" in describing itself), the only verifiable markers are: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith. Art follows pretty much all that. Its entire meaning, if it has any, is that which the observer gives it. How more perfect a system of belief can you get? . . . whenever any government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such forms as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Oct 23, 2003, 12:26 am	#31 (permalink) (top)
RebelWithanAK Igneous Magma Location: New York City Posts: 739	What does Christianity say about achieving happiness? Not a damned lot. Twoshanks, art is emotional and it isn't. It's puritanical and it isn't. It's all-enveloping and entirely unnecessary. And you still can't live without it. You choose to believe in it what you will, however much you will. It's art. It's superfluous, and yet it feels right. This is half tongue-in-cheek, and yet it's certainly got a lot more for it than the big three... . . . whenever any government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such forms as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Oct 23, 2003, 12:41 am	#33 (permalink) (top)
RebelWithanAK Igneous Magma Location: New York City Posts: 739	That's not happiness, that's contentment. There's a difference. . . . whenever any government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such forms as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Oct 22, 2003, 10:29 pm	#21 (permalink) (top)
TwoShanks Molten Ash Posts: 29	I would argue against the idea that art is everything, but since that is self-evidently absurd I won't bother. I would suggest that soft atheism is the most rational religious viewpoint.

Oct 22, 2003, 10:57 pm	#23 (permalink) (top)
TwoShanks Molten Ash Posts: 29	I can't live without air, but I don't think air is everything. How is art a religion anyway?

Oct 22, 2003, 11:02 pm	#24 (permalink) (top)
eXploiTeD Molten Ash Posts: 32	... It is quite obvious that Water, in all of its liquid glory, is the One True Religion.

Oct 22, 2003, 11:46 pm	#26 (permalink) (top)
TwoShanks Molten Ash Posts: 29	From the Merriam-Webster online dictionary: Main Entry: re·li·gion Pronunciation: ri-'li-j&n Function: noun Etymology: Middle English religioun, from Latin religion-, religio supernatural constraint, sanction, religious practice, perhaps from religare to restrain, tie back -- more at RELY Date: 13th century 1 a : the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion> b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance 2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices 3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : CONSCIENTIOUSNESS 4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith - re·li·gion·less adjective I fear that art does not come under these definitions. Perhaps you could explain to me why you think art is a religion? Or even what you think the word "religion" means?

Oct 22, 2003, 11:48 pm	#27 (permalink) (top)
eXploiTeD Molten Ash Posts: 32	Than what of fecal matter? And lustful yearnings of pedophiles? Since, by your definition, a religion can be considered legitimate if it cannot be disproven, by extension, both of these things can properly be considered religious doctrines or tools.

Oct 23, 2003, 12:01 am	#29 (permalink) (top)
TwoShanks Molten Ash Posts: 29	And what is the "cause, principle or system of belief" that you hold with ardor and faith in relation to art? Is there some kind of special art belief system that nobody told me about? In what do you place your faith in relation to art?

Oct 23, 2003, 12:01 am	#30 (permalink) (top)
eXploiTeD Molten Ash Posts: 32	Interesting... Okay, so, what does Art have to say in regards to achieving happiness? And what of moral behaviour?

Oct 23, 2003, 12:36 am	#32 (permalink) (top)
eXploiTeD Molten Ash Posts: 32	I'd agree, Christianity doesn't say alot. But Buddhism does, considering its major premise is that all life is suffering and in order to escape that suffering, one must... You get the idea. Most religions say alot about happiness, actually.

Oct 23, 2003, 01:05 am	#34 (permalink) (top)
eXploiTeD Molten Ash Posts: 32	I disagree, but we'll assume your right. Does that in some way make your statement that 'art is a religion' any less pseudo-intellectual in its nature?

Oct 23, 2003, 01:06 am	#35 (permalink) (top)
RebelWithanAK Igneous Magma Location: New York City Posts: 739	That's assuming religion is intellectual. . . . whenever any government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such forms as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Oct 23, 2003, 01:11 am	#36 (permalink) (top)
eXploiTeD Molten Ash Posts: 32	...Actually, its assuming that you are a pseudo-intellectual. But its more of a conclusion than an assumption. Nonetheless.

Oct 23, 2003, 11:22 am	#37 (permalink) (top)
RebelWithanAK Igneous Magma Location: New York City Posts: 739	To tell you the truth, I'd rather talk about anything to get the topic off wicca and neo-paganism. I'm tired of comfortable yuppies talk about new-agey crap religions like they were trading cards. Spirituality will come to you when you need it, not because you think it fashionable at the time. That, and you appear to be having trouble contradicting my art claim. =p . . . whenever any government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such forms as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Oct 23, 2003, 05:27 pm	#38 (permalink) (top)
G. Adams Fyrdman Location: Middlesbrough UK Posts: 4,152	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (RebelWithanAK,) To tell you the truth, I'd rather talk about anything to get the topic off wicca and neo-paganism. I'm tired of comfortable yuppies talk about new-agey crap religions like they were trading cards. Spirituality will come to you when you need it, not because you think it fashionable at the time. That, and you appear to be having trouble contradicting my art claim. =p<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> I am not a damned yuppy, i'm a post-materialist without further refinement of my definition. And he mentioned he didn't know a whole lost about it so I said what I knew. And you've talked a lot more about art being a religion than there is on neo-paganism. And its not a fashion thing either, whether it is in fashion or not. Its a rejection of authoritarian religions and a glorification of the spiritual self. So there :P Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. Winston Churchill

Oct 23, 2003, 05:28 pm	#39 (permalink) (top)
G. Adams Fyrdman Location: Middlesbrough UK Posts: 4,152	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (RebelWithanAK,) That's not happiness, that's contentment. There's a difference.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Ending suffering isn't in itself happiness, but ending suffering is part of enlightenment, which is internal happiness. And that is the only permanent happiness, as all physical joys fade with time, and their fading is itself a cause of suffering. Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. Winston Churchill

Oct 23, 2003, 05:40 pm	#40 (permalink) (top)
RebelWithanAK Igneous Magma Location: New York City Posts: 739	Semantics, semantics, semantics. . . . whenever any government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such forms as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.