Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search


(17,671 posts)
34. I think you might be asking an unfair question there.
Sat Dec 24, 2011, 05:08 PM
Dec 2011

Traditional religions shouldn't claim any direct contribution in the advancement of empirical knowledge a la creation science and all the rest. It's not really fair to demand that of religion and at the same time lambaste it for involving itself in matters beyond its ken.

Scientific and technological developments depend on the cooperation of people not only within cultures but across generations. If cooperation didn't feel good, we wouldn't have done it. Religion helps facilitate that sense of cooperation. Other ways might have been developed, but they weren't. And I don't mind so much. I've never been comfortable with the idea of "non overlapping magisteria". To my mind they overlap constantly - within each of us. The struggle to reconcile one with the other has resulted with some of the greatest accomplishments and failures of the human race.

As someone who has little understanding or use for mathematics I find it interesting that mathematical infinity is described as something other than real numbers but nevertheless is useful in calculation. At the same time, the concept of god is considered infinite but is expressed in emotional terms and is useful in understanding our motives, as are most of the concepts of religious faith. Certainly heaven and hell are considered emotional states continued into infinity. Isn't it interesting that the concept of infinity finds its way so easily into both our understanding of the world and our understanding of ourselves?

In mathematics, "infinity" is often treated as if it were a number (i.e., it counts or measures things: "an infinite number of terms&quot but it is not the same sort of number as the real numbers. In number systems incorporating infinitesimals, the reciprocal of an infinitesimal is an infinite number, i.e. a number greater than any real number. Georg Cantor formalized many ideas related to infinity and infinite sets during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. In the theory he developed, there are infinite sets of different sizes (called cardinalities).[1] For example, the set of integers is countably infinite, while the set of real numbers is uncountably infinite.

Attributes of God

1 John 4:16 says "God is Love." D. A. Carson speaks of the "difficult doctrine of the love of God," since "when informed Christians talk about the love of God they mean something very different from what is meant in the surrounding culture."[11] Carson distinguishes between the love the Father has for the Son, God's general love for his creation, God's "salvific stance towards his fallen world," his "particular, effectual, selecting love toward his elect," and love that is conditioned on obedience.

The infinity of God includes both his eternity and his immensity. Isaiah 40:28 says that "Yahweh is the everlasting God," while Solomon acknowledges in 1 Kings 8:27 that "the heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain you". Infinity permeates all other attributes of God: His love is infinite, his powers are infinite...

The development of linear perspective is one of the hallmarks of the Renaissance. It is a visual representation of infinity and evidence of an outward looking into the world after hundreds of years of emotional introspection and mysticism in Mideivel Europe. The need for order, balance, clarity and harmony was an expected response to the difficulties experienced with sectarian wars and increasing population density and mobility that brought with them appalling living conditions and inconveniences like Bubonic plague.

In about 1413 a contemporary of Ghiberti, Filippo Brunelleschi, demonstrated the geometrical method of perspective, used today by artists, by painting the outlines of various Florentine buildings onto a mirror. When the building's outline was continued, he noticed that all of the lines converged on the horizon line. According to Vasari, he then set up a demonstration of his painting of the Baptistery in the incomplete doorway of the Duomo. He had the viewer look through a small hole on the back of the painting, facing the Baptistery. He would then set up a mirror, facing the viewer, which reflected his painting. To the viewer, the painting of the Baptistery and the Baptistery itself were nearly indistinguishable.

[font color="grey" size="number" face="fontname"] Pietro Perugino's usage of perspective in this fresco at the Sistine Chapel (1481–82) helped bring the Renaissance to Rome.[/font]

The need for accuracy in perception of the world around us is obvious in the development of linear perspective. But the introspective metaphor of using a mirror to view the works of our creation as we peer through a hole behind them so that we may better understand the world around us is difficult to escape in Brunelleschi's demonstration.

Prior to the development of linear perspective imagery was rendered flat as an object in itself and was the hallmark of medieval art. This is not because the artists of the time had no notion of perspective, they just had no use for it. They were using imagery to express something other than an empirical understanding of the outside world. The art of the time was used to investigate and express a spirituality that we today cannot possibly imagine. In fact, that lack of spirituality may be one of the more troubling aspects of the human experience in modern times. The cultural tools we have traditionally used to investigate our inner selves have become little more than ideology factories more interested in market share than introspection. Certainly, much of what troubles our modern lifestyle is a sense of anomie that permeates our relationships with others.

It seems that the change from representational to iconic imagery has been cyclical, much like humanity's search for some sort of balance between what we know outside and what we feel inside. From the development of contrapposto in Greek sculpture to the image of Christ in the chapel of San Marco's Basilica which, I can attest from personal experience, still works. As I turned for one last look in the chapel before I left I saw the image of Christ looking down on me exactly as it had for hundreds of years and it gave me, an unrepentant iconoclast, chills.

It seems to me that cycle continues today. Compare this image from the twelfth century with a work by the modernist painter Frank Stella from 1959. Both are objects rather than a window into another space. If the first is an object to be used to prompt an emotional response in tune with the prevailing spirituality of the time, could a stereotypically modernist painting be understood as an object to prompt the same emotional relationship to spirituality?

[font color="grey" size="number" face="fontname"]Mary Magdalen announcing the Resurrection to the Apostles, St Albans Psalter, English, 1120-1145.[/font]

[font color="grey" size="number" face="fontname"]Frank Stella, Enamel on canvas, 84 x 109 in. / 213.3 x 276.8 cm., 1959[/font]

The Stella, much like the Psalter before it, was produced at the height of the zeitgeist of its time. It too was designed as an expression and a glorification of that spiritual paradigm. Medieval cathedrals were built to be an expression of heaven on earth and modern architecture seems to be designed to perform the same spiritual function. The nature of that spirituality, to me, is troubling. It is a barren and forbidding sense of being that is becoming increasingly untenable given the environmental problems we have created through the ill considered use of technology.

To my mind religion, as a systematized expression of faith, is just a tool designed to do certain things. One might say we can have faith in a deity or in a process and the practice of expressing that faith results in consequences that can be a blessing or a disaster. Sometimes I think that the only difference between the two is how long we cling to one or the other far beyond its utility until it becomes a liability.
None at all...... frebrd Dec 2011 #1
You may be right. I would have thought there would be some examples. cleanhippie Dec 2011 #2
Religion has been a huge intertwined part of our world for LARED Dec 2011 #3
Well, from my POV, everything we as humans have achieved, did not come from religion. cleanhippie Dec 2011 #4
What you seem to be actually asking is LARED Dec 2011 #20
I can see how you might think that, but I am simply asking what advancements rteligion has brought cleanhippie Dec 2011 #23
Why are you so concerned about being right? Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #37
It was useful to control the masses Eliminator Dec 2011 #5
If Islam replaced the word religion people would be all over this post denouncing it and would be Quartermass Dec 2011 #6
How is asking a question racist/bigoted? moobu2 Dec 2011 #7
I am having trouble figuring out how you Angry Dragon Dec 2011 #9
Consider the following pairs of phrases: ZombieHorde Dec 2011 #10
I really don't understand where you came up with that defintion of bigotry. cleanhippie Dec 2011 #16
I thought only Dorian Gray Dec 2011 #60
Well, some are more sacred than others. cleanhippie Dec 2011 #61
OK, What contirbution has Islam given to the advancement of mankind that has come from nowhere else? mr blur Dec 2011 #21
Asking "What has Islam contributed to human society?" is not bigoted. ChadwickHenryWard Dec 2011 #25
Positive religious experiences. ZombieHorde Dec 2011 #8
I think it's actually the opposite tinrobot Dec 2011 #14
Siddhartha learned meditation through his birth religion, Hinduism. nt ZombieHorde Dec 2011 #27
...and where did the first Hindu learn meditation? tinrobot Dec 2011 #29
They developed it to be closer to their gods. ZombieHorde Dec 2011 #30
Gunpowder was invented by Taoist alchemists tinrobot Dec 2011 #11
But was it a result of the religion? laconicsax Dec 2011 #12
Did their religion give them some kind of knowledge that they used to make gunpowder? cleanhippie Dec 2011 #17
There's this.... dmallind Dec 2011 #13
There is what? Architecture? Construction techniques? Engineering? cleanhippie Dec 2011 #18
Find me a non-religious building that spectacular dmallind Dec 2011 #33
It is a beautiful building, but humankind has not advanced because of it. cleanhippie Dec 2011 #35
I get it now... dmallind Dec 2011 #40
Unfortunately, no, you don't get it. cleanhippie Dec 2011 #43
The first rule of research... rrneck Dec 2011 #45
List of Roman Catholic cleric–scientists tinrobot Dec 2011 #15
Did they get their scientific education and knowledge from religion? cleanhippie Dec 2011 #19
You're moving the target. tinrobot Dec 2011 #22
Hmm, thats an interesting way of looking at my question. And you are right. cleanhippie Dec 2011 #24
Religion is just one ingredient of many... tinrobot Dec 2011 #31
I like your cake analogy. cleanhippie Dec 2011 #32
Well, for a more on topic response; Quartermass Dec 2011 #26
That is an intersting list. Did their belief in a deity, or the dogma of their religion lead to.. cleanhippie Dec 2011 #28
I think you might be asking an unfair question there. rrneck Dec 2011 #34
Zerzan tama Dec 2011 #36
Religion, at least the Christian forms of religion, are not LARED Dec 2011 #38
I couldn't agree more. Christianity has never been concerned with the betterment of man. cleanhippie Dec 2011 #39
That's not my experience. nt LARED Dec 2011 #41
Hmm, thats not what you just stated above. cleanhippie Dec 2011 #42
I was referring to the snarky part of your comment LARED Dec 2011 #46
That was not snark. I meant every word. cleanhippie Dec 2011 #50
I'm sure you did LARED Dec 2011 #51
Uhm, okay. cleanhippie Dec 2011 #52
You might want to confirm the definition of snarky if you don't like what I say. nt LARED Dec 2011 #53
I see a trend with your posts: you could care less about what a person actually says... cleanhippie Dec 2011 #54
The irony of this post is breathtaking. cbayer Dec 2011 #55
If you say so... cleanhippie Dec 2011 #56
+1 nt LARED Dec 2011 #57
Hmm, strange for a Christian believer to say that. I mean... MarkCharles Dec 2011 #44
Not strange at all LARED Dec 2011 #47
Is there Christianity tama Dec 2011 #48
Sure they can nt LARED Dec 2011 #49
Scientism As Rationalization And Ultimate Religion Jim__ Dec 2011 #58
relgion has provided social structure where it probably did more good than the lack of the structure lindysalsagal Dec 2011 #59
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»What contirbution has rel...»Reply #34