Beauty And Religion

At first glance, many would define these idea without the input of religion. Most of how I define these ideas are subjective, and from an outsiders’ point of view into religious ideas. Beauty to me is the most subjective out of the three to define, and needs context in order to do so. It can be an emotional or physical thing, either felt or seen. When talking about non-religious aspects of life, beauty can be a person, place, or thing. Usually I have emotional ties with that aspect in order to call it “beautiful.” Truth to me is seen as something that can be proven or disproven, yet this idea gets complicated when intermixing with religion. Those who believe certain things to be true, such as Gods existence, hold that to be their truth. But,

This is an idea I have come to learn to believe from this class, as I have not had any ties to God or religious faith. Richter includes that beauty is seen or felt from a religious experience, in forms such as: music, art, dance, or scriptures (168-69). Now what separates a religious experience from any other experience? A religious experience is often defined as such by someone who truly believes that. Making these experiences personal and subjective. Many religious groups have their own reasons as to why their faith is beautiful. Christian philosopher Thomas Aquinas popularized the term Beatific Vision, meaning that God strengthens us by the “light of glory.” This relates to a Christian doctrine that suggests that God loves the world, so he must love “me,” making the individual whole and happy in God’s presence. In contrast, Baha’i’s believe that we shine off of God’s perfections, truth, and attributes. From Richter’s ideas, I formed a new definition of beauty: beauty is a religious truth that is seen as beautiful to those who follow a certain faith or system of beliefs. I find that because beauty is so subjective, everyone should have the right to their opinion. I respect anyone who stays to true to what they believe, regardless of what other people think, that in itself it quite beautiful. As we can see, truth also plays a big role in defining beauty.

Satori

On the other hand, Richter does not look at what is deemed good or bad, but rather what the induvial ought to do (118-19). He goes on to say that the idea of “Morality” pays more attention to decision making. The basis of his argument is put into terms of teleology and deontology.

Deontology refers to the fact that we should obey the rules because they are the rules, regardless of context or justification for breaking such rules. Often it keeps us from doing things only for the end result, rules guide us to do the right thing even if that takes away our hoped-for result.

Teleology holds the total opposite idea, where our actions are justified by what we accomplish in the end.

One interesting idea Richter brings up is that goodness or morality is neither teleological or deontological. Moral exemplars refer to the idea that most religions do not have a specific way they want their people to live or abide by. The hope is that their followers will gain a strong understanding of what it means to live by these ideals, eventually inspiring others to do the