Atheists: Prove that beauty exists

[humble_in_doubt]

Being that they were “human”, I believe they were compelled as we are, to express themselves. Why are we the only mammals/creatures to do so?

Gee let me see … because we’re the only “intelligent creatures” with two hands that can hold a paint brush or a chisel; but I’m sure you have a profound point in all of this (so why don’t you enlighten me)???

 

[humble_in_doubt]

What is beauty or better yet how do you define beauty? And what do find is beautiful in our everyday world?

" Great beauty elevates the soul, and the literature of conversion is replete with testimony from those whose hearts were truly moved to faith by the works of Bach, and Michelangelo, and Dante, and the romances of the Holy Grail. Plato spoke of four transcendentals: the one, the true, the good, and the beautiful. Any of these paths can take our friends above and beyond the everyday; and from there they might see their way clear to God."

I never said religious art never existed … obviously it did (I’ve been to the Vatican enough times to be intimately familiar with religious art). My point is simply that art is not exclusively religious (or even mostly religious). Indeed art predated religion, and religious art is the exception, historically speaking, not the norm.

I gotta say … you guys are stubborn. Why not simply admit the OP assertion is fallacious (as I’ve shown it to be ad nausea), and stop making yourselves look foolish. Religion did not invent art & art clearly predated the Old Testament (and no scholar, Catholic or otherwise, disputes this).

Case closed!!!

 

[josie_L]

I never said religious art never existed … obviously it did (I’ve been to the Vatican enough times to be intimately familiar with religious art). My point was simply that art is not exclusively religious (or even mostly religious). Indeed art predated history, and religious art is the exception not the norm.

That wasn’t the point of my post, nor was I trying to argue with you. I wanted you to answer the questions I posted.

 

[josie_L]

Gee let me see … because we’re the only “intelligent creatures” with two hands that can hold a paint brush or a chisel; but I’m sure you have a profound point in all of this (so why don’t you enlighten me)???

Because we have a soul and we were created in the image of God.

 

[humble_in_doubt]

That wasn’t the point of my post, nor was I trying to argue with you. I wanted you to answer the questions I posted.

my definition of beauty? I think everything can be beautiful. I don’t try to define beauty, because by trying to define it we say that everything which doesn’t fit into our preconceived mold is ugly.

However, I can define ugliness (and I think that’s the better way to approach this question). There are things that deserve the stamp of ugly. Violence and brutality for one. Exploitation for another. Obviously these are actions and ideas, yet they can take a form (a human form). Anyway … I digress into hyper-sophism

 

[josie_L]

my definition of beauty? I think everything can be beautiful. I don’t try to define beauty, because by trying to define it we say that everything which doesn’t fit into our preconceived mold is ugly.

What have you found in your everyday world that is beautiful, and how does it make you feel?

 

[Thing]

Most atheists I’ve encountered tend to be “materialists”, denying the existence of that which they cannot prove with physical evidence (usually scientifically garnered).

So, can you prove that beauty exists? What proof and evidence do you have that such a thing that beauty exists? What scientific tests did you use to prove this, and where is your evidence and results that can be independently verified and reproduced?

Humm… the original post seems to be asking if one can prove an intangible like *beauty *by using empirical scientific techniques.
Everyone accepts that beauty exists, despite a lack of science proving its reality, but not everyone accepts that a Creator exists.
Art can be a human response to beauty perceived. We see artists attempting to show the quality beauty. Art draws from nature, and obviously parts of nature predate people. Parts of nature predate planets even. One could say even that there is beauty in the mathematics of the first few nanoseconds after the big bang. So is the quality beauty inherent in Nature as a whole. What function could beauty have had in the creation of the universe and stranger still for this Nature to have given rise to creatures who could recognise the beauty in Nature and in life. What function does it serve.

 

[rjward1775]

I think a more pertinent question is: Prove the existence of Love.

Love cannot be seen, touched or smelled. Even brain scans are just a side-effect of love, not the love itself.

We CAN see the results of love.

Just like God. We can only see what He has made. We see the flowers, stars and universe He created.

 

[humble_in_doubt]

I think a more pertinent question is: Prove the existence of Love.

Love cannot be seen, touched or smelled. Even brain scans are just a side-effect of love, not the love itself.

We CAN see the results of love.

Just like God. We can only see what He has made. We see the flowers, stars and universe He created.

In the same vein prove the existence of anger, sadness, depression, rage, mania, or whatever other emotion you can think of? Love is no different than any of these other emotions, albeit it’s preferable to emotions like anger. The results of anger can be seen, brain scans only see the results of anger … not the anger itself … and so on.

So I guess your point is humans have emotions. BTW so do dogs, but what does that really show us?

 

[rjward1775]

Essentially, yes.

Emotions are something we all agree exist and cannot prove they exist.

 

[josie_L]

In the same vein prove the existence of anger, sadness, depression, rage, mania, or whatever other emotion you can think of? Love is no different than any of these other emotions, albeit it’s preferable to emotions like anger. The results of anger can be seen, brain scans only see the results of anger … not the anger itself … and so on.

So I guess your point is humans have emotions. BTW so do dogs, but what does that really show us?

So, love is just preferable to anger, are you kidding me? Humble, I would think that love is a lot more than preferable, in fact, it’s essential to life that we have love, I mean how many people mate only so they can have children without there being a basis of love at its core (whereas animals have no problem mating just on the basis of instinct alone)? You act as if dogs/animals and humans act in a similar manner, just because they may share some emotional qualities.

 

[humble_in_doubt]

So, love is just preferable to anger, are you kidding me? Humble, I would think that love is a lot more than preferable, in fact, it’s essential to life that we have love, I mean how many people mate only so they can have children without there being a basis of love at its core (whereas animals have no problem mating just on the basis of instinct alone)? You act as if dogs/animals and humans act in a similar manner, just because they may share some emotional qualities.

I wouldn’t say it’s “essential to life” … but it’s pretty nice all the same!

 

[humble_in_doubt]

Essentially, yes.

Emotions are something we all agree exist and cannot prove they exist.

well, yeah

I would say though we can prove emotions exist … we just can’t prove why they exist (but of course I’m three sheets under the wind right now … so I’ll have to examine the logic of this statement tomorrow). I love Tennessee (they make Jack Daniels … pretty sweet)!

 

[Benjamin8o8]

God is love, this is how we know it exists. When I pray, I aproach God with an earnest heart and therefore I get closer to His love every day. It is truly amazing, even when I dont concentrate on my prayers as I should (I do drift off) there is an overwhelming feeling that overcomes me, I can´t explain it but I feel the presence of God and His Mother and angels. I also feel that people around me change when I pray for them. Its just a mystery that you can not describibe. This is why I believe in God, because He is PURE Love. If you only had the chance to experience a small portion of His love you would die.

I know when I look at my younger sibliings and I witness how adorable they are, this creation can only come from God. Nobody told us that a new born baby is beutiful because it just is! We didn´t have to evolve to realize that a kitten is designed, we can just see it. If you ask God for forgivness and ask Him to enter your heart He will most certainly do that! I asked God last summer to give me another chance (not that I commited a mortal sin, I just wanted to have a deeper relationship with my Lord, the creator of all) The same day I went out to play soccer with a bunch of friends I met, and when I walked back to my friends home (I was on vacation) I met my local priest (when I lived at that area) I greeted him and he told me if I want to see something beutiful I should go down to the basement Chappel. So I did, and when I climbed down the stairs I was greeted with a crowd singing praises and worshiping our Lord in the Eucharist. I fell on my knees and tears began to drizzle from my face, I was kinda embarrasing because I just came from soccer and I was drained in sweat, but regardless I was on my knees and even though I didn´t understand what the Priest was praying (because it was in spanish) I still felt the true Presence.

We really don`t have to look for God beyond our hearts. Just do what Jesus asked “ask and it will be given to you”. If you ask for God to reveal Himself to you in some way you have to trully ask Him. God never lets nobody down. At the end of the day, it all boils down to humility and if you are ready to make that decision.

 

[josie_L]

I wouldn’t say it’s “essential to life” … but it’s pretty nice all the same!

Love is essential to life. We are not heartless beings.

 

[humble_in_doubt]

Love is essential to life. We are not heartless beings.

What I meant was technically speaking people who are truly incapable of loving anyone (extreme sociopaths) can continue breathing and living (and sadly there’s many of them who do). I suppose there’s different levels of sociopathy (but I’m not a shrink so I can’t really discuss this with any level of authority & I don’t feel like learning any more psychology beyond the couple of course I took as an undergrad).

 

[rjward1775]

Biologically, man can live without love or shelter or clothing. Just food, water and air, but can such an existence truly be called life?

Love IS essential, just as is laughter. Think of a person denied love their whole life? They would be twisted beyond what we would call a ‘person’.

 

[humble_in_doubt]

Biologically, man can live without love or shelter or clothing. Just food, water and air, but can such an existence truly be called life?

Love IS essential, just as is laughter. Think of a person denied love their whole life? They would be twisted beyond what we would call a ‘person’.

To say a person who rarely had contact with “love” is not a person at all is quite an alarming statement from my point of view. Certainly I feel sorry for such a person, but they remain a person all the same? Denying the personhood of any human being is to say they’re subhuman.

You’re statement doesn’t sound very Christian to me … but perhaps I misconstrued your words (I hope so).

 

[josie_L]

What I meant was technically speaking people who are truly incapable of loving anyone (extreme sociopaths) can continue breathing and living (and sadly there’s many of them who do). I suppose there’s different levels of sociopathy (but I’m not a shrink so I can’t really discuss this with any level of authority & I don’t feel like learning any more psychology beyond the couple of course I took as an undergrad).

Well, there are always exceptions to the rule, Humble, but generally speaking most of us are not like this, and we do need love to sustain us. You cannot go through life without love, and I’m not even sure what that would do to a person, who didn’t know love. As such humans are different from other animals/creatures, who for the most part act on instinct alone. It is not necessary for animals to love.

Do you remember the story of a girl who was treated like an animal (I believe she was couped up by her parents)? Anyways, she was has a result of this treatment very savage, in due time however, with care and love, she was brought back from that abyss. And last I heard she is quite sane and happy. I think she wrote a book.

 

[josie_L]

To say a person who rarely had contact with “love” is not a person at all is quite an alarming statement from my point of view. Certainly I feel sorry for such a person, but they remain a person all the same? Denying the personhood of any human being is to say they’re subhuman.

Oh, I couldn’t resist, but this is why I’m against abortion.