The Fork in the Road: Religion, Philosophy, and Art
The major difference among these three perspectives is their approach to achieving an understanding of truth and knowledge. Religion seems a logical first step in this discussion because it seems to be the most structured of the three perspectives. What discerns religious activity from mere belief is the power of a binding text or established set of rules. This binding force allows for a guided experience toward truth and knowledge. Spearheading all of this effort in most cases is a deity such as the Christian God or Allah, and in a few cases by a transcendent notion such as reincarnation. Thus, religious activity is in the name of these figures and in accordance with rules set down in a divine nature.
One view on religion as truth comes in Paul’s First Letter to the Corinthians. The essence of this work is Paul’s insistence on the unity of believers over those who are disbelievers (1:10). Paul discusses man’s connection to God as one that is necessary to achieve a level beyond flesh. The more important discussion in this letter is the necessity for a common ground for believers and future converts to start their devotion. Paul casts derision upon the division of belief within Corinth and other hubs of civilization as the folly of ignorance (3:16). Paul speaks as a vassal of God and insists that in order to achieve the level of devotion similar to his, there is a need to adopt the common rules cast down by God to his mouthpiece (Jesus and his disciples) (1:1). Christianity, as Paul suggests, is a road paved by divine regulation with the result of salvation from flesh and sin.
Paul presents the positive view of religion that is, obviously, common among believers and the faithful. However, there is an opposition to this religious devotion that takes form in Euripides’ Medea and The Bacchae. Euripides is either an atheist or, at the very least, a critical observer of organized religion. In Medea, the title character seeks to exact revenge upon her former husband Jason. In order to do this, she kills his future bride and then her own children. All of this was done in the name of revenge, which seems to be accepted by the gods. In the end, Medea takes her dead children with her on a chariot provided by the gods and escapes to a new land (Roche, p.389). It is obvious that there is an edge of criticism toward a belief in deities or a transcendent figure, because the nature of Medea’s escape in relation to her actions is ridiculous. The acceptance of these murders by the gods implies their unjust and arbitrary manner. There is no order to religious belief, according to Medea.
The Bacchae is a much more explicit review of organized religion and its relation to truth. In this story, Pentheus encounters what he deems a dangerous cult in his land and seeks to remedy the effect it is having upon his people. The transcendent figure of this cult is the god Dionysus, who is disguised in human form and captured by Pentheus. In summary, Pentheus encounters the true fury of organized religion in the form of the Bacchantes, believers that are whirled into frenzy with religious inspiration (Roche, p.438-42). Euripides is making a statement that the reasoning of the average, secular man would be destroyed by religious fanaticism. The Bacchants were brainwashed by their love of this transcendent figure and lived in a community of fellow believers. Euripides is making an obvious statement against organized religion.
The second perspective that needs to be discussed is that of philosophy. Philosophy is less structured than religion and seeks truth and knowledge in a different way. Instead of seeking some explanation from a higher being or separate figure, philosophy seeks to use what humanity is endowed with: speech, intellect, and curiosity. These three tools establish a common base of necessities in order to philosophize, which in turn creates a hierarchy of the intellectual and the non-intellectual. The intellectual have a responsibility to dispense whatever knowledge they have acquired, especially to those not disposed to philosophy. In summation, philosophy is a structure of knowledge that relies on a dispensation of acquired knowledge and abilities to help the non-intellectual achieve a common ground of truth and knowledge.
The pinnacle of readings on philosophy in the Western world is Plato’s Symposium. What makes this work so illustrative of the nature of philosophy is the way in which it presents alternative ideas. One illustration of love talks about the creation of creatures that are split in half and their purpose in life is to find those halves that they are naturally attracted to (Cobb, 190c). Another illustration of love talks about love as a god, a higher nature that should be an aspiration to humanity (Cobb, 178c). Socrates blows all of these notions out of the water with his discussion of the daimon Diotima, whom speaks of the virtues of philosophy and finding balance between desire and reason (Cobb, 203b-212c). Plato explores the weaknesses of religion, poetry, and mythology and exposes them to the wonders of philosophy. Socrates is the foil for Plato’s notion of philosophy as achieving a higher good, an achievement of truth and everlasting knowledge.
Paul’s letter seems to speak against philosophy as some sort of poison or distraction from true devotion. He speaks against the divisions of Christian belief by those who sought out other gods, laws, or means to truth (1:11). I think it is obvious in not just this reading but in any reading that organized religion, though rooted in philosophy to a minor extent, speaks ill of philosophy as a deterrent from true faith. Seeking out the truth by imploring the resources of mankind goes against the very nature of Christian theology as well as many other religious ideologies. Man is conceded to be flawed and the only way to escape these flaws is via a figure outside of humanity, especially deities that are perfect and capable of leading the flawed. Philosophy is the bane of religion’s nature.
Art is the third and least organized of perspectives on truth and knowledge. Art is the indirect pursuit of truth and knowledge by means of expression like painting, writing, and other manipulations of reality. The way art expresses virtue is by exposing what the mind’s eye sees. We may draw a picture of the sunset as we see it, but there is universality to what a sunset is. Every picture of a sunset, despite whatever artistic license may be given to it, has some of the same characteristics. This is what a sunset is and its nature is truth and knowledge to us. In a sense, it is a literal interpretation of what is created in artistic endeavors; what we perceive is what we are and our ability to grasp it through art is an admission of what reality is.
All three authors that we have discussed in class express art in their work. In Euripides’ Medea, the title character savors in the beauty of her revenge. The art form of revenge is expressed throughout the work, as a necessity to create justice as well as a supremely crafted action. Revenge is beautiful and prerequisite for justice in the eyes of Medea. In Plato’s Phaedrus, Socrates and Phaedrus discuss the virtue of speech. Speech is an art form like any other because it seeks to quantify the human experience in a tangible way. To Socrates (and Plato indirectly), speech is the ultimate of art forms because it expresses the ultimate reality of philosophy. Paul’s Letter to the Corinthians relies on the art of speech and expression to portray the perspective of reality from the Christian point of view. Despite ideological differences, there is still the attempt to quantify what is right and wrong in the world in words, which is just as artistic as a painting or a speech. In this sense, art is at least a secondary means to the end of expressing Christian values.
As I have shown in this paper, art is the most valuable expression of truth and knowledge because it is within the reach of everyone, there is a versatility of expression, and art is independent of the religious reliance on a transcendent figure. All three perspectives are valuable in the discourse on truth and knowledge. Nevertheless, art seems to me to be the avenue toward these virtues that allows us the greatest autonomy and ability to express ourselves. Art does not rely heavily on doctrine or structure, but allows the individual a means of expressing the human reality experience in tangible form. Art is the universal means towards truth and knowledge.
