In this episode we dive into aesthetics, the study of beauty and art. WE have a few digressions here, including one about Van Gogh and another about micro-bears on the moon. Yeah.

But we also talk about:

• Defining beauty
• Why Plato didn't appreciate art, and why Aristotle did
• The radiance of the form
• How beauty relates to God
• How beauty relates to truth and goodness
• How a naturalist would develop a theory of beauty
• And a few things more

Hey, good morning.

2

Good morning.

3

How you doing?

4

Doing well.

5

Excited to be talking

about, beauty today.

6

This is one that I love to talk about,

but it's very difficult to talk about.

7

how come?

8

Beauty tends to go beyond our

rational ability to communicate

9

the concepts about it.

10

It's not that it's irrational,

but it goes beyond rationality.

11

And so our words, of course,

are based on rational concepts.

12

They don't always do justice

to the ideas that we're talking

13

about when we talk about beauty.

14

Huh.

15

Well, I'm excited for you to

unpack that a little bit more.

16

Yeah.

17

As we go.

18

so why are we talking about beauty then?

19

Just to kind of start us off.

20

Because it's beautiful, man..

21

Has, for me, at least, become the central

part of who I am and what I think about.

22

in my religious life.

23

So I think when I was young, say in

my teens and twenties, don't know

24

if I thought about beauty that much.

25

I mean, everyone appreciates beauty, but I

didn't really think about it a whole lot.

26

And I think I tended to interact with God.

27

more on a conceptual or,

or an intellectual level.

28

And I don't think that's the case anymore.

29

I think that as I've gotten older, the

idea of beauty, of understanding this

30

world, beauty in a certain way, has become

really foundational to who I am as a

31

person, but also my relationship with God.

32

Wow.

33

Do you, do you appreciate art more, and

enjoy that now as you've gotten older?

34

Oh yeah.

35

A hundred times more.

36

Wow.

37

What does that look like,

just out of curiosity?

38

Well, it looks like I go

to museums a lot more.

39

I have a whole shelf or

two full of art books.

40

I also, of course, appreciate

natural beauty, even more than I

41

did as a, as a child or a teen.

42

Yeah, I remember one time, a couple

years walking with you, and you pointing

43

out one of the trees on the path.

44

And you were like, oh,

this is that kind of tree.

45

And you were like, these are the only

places, this is the only place where these

46

are in Franklin that you're aware of.

47

And I was like, oh, that's so interesting.

48

You just appreciated the, the

tree you knew what kind it was.

49

And, uh, I feel like hanging

out with you has helped me

50

appreciate natural beauty as well.

51

More just in trees and animals

and that kind of thing.

52

Well, that makes me happy.

53

Yeah, yeah.

54

Actually, I, don't know if I've shared

that with you before, but I, do feel

55

like that's a sincere, like I notice it

a lot more just by spending time with you.

56

That makes me very happy.

57

Yeah.

58

And also, thank you for the, nice

Christmas gift of the Van Gogh book.

59

Oh, yeah.

60

That's enjoyable to look

through and see, his work.

61

Yeah.

62

And,, I will say for some reason, Van

Gogh is my favorite visual artist.

63

And I'm not sure why.

64

I can't really put it into words.

65

I have some ideas.

66

Maybe we'll talk about that later.

67

Since we're here, can

I just ask, like, why?

68

You said you can't put it in

words, but here, here we go.

69

Well, I'm not sure I

can put it into words.

70

One of the things that we'll talk

about today is that art has a way

71

of expressing the beauty of the

form or the essence of something in

72

a way that's unique to human art.

73

And I think

74

, some people, some artists are able

to do that in a very unique way.

75

And to me, at least,

Van Gogh is that person.

76

Other people, other artists as

well, but for me, he does that.

77

You don't look at his art and you

say, Oh, that is a beautiful and

78

perfect representation of that field

or that countryside or that person.

79

To me at least, I see the

essence of that thing.

80

Even though, from a technical point of

view, it didn't look exactly like that.

81

Yeah.

82

it's not realism.

83

No.

84

And realism is great, but

we have cameras for that.

85

Yeah.

86

When I look at art, at least for

me, at this stage in my life, I want

87

to see the essence of something.

88

Okay, cool.

89

So beauty for today.

90

Yeah, well let me give you an

overview of aesthetics very briefly.

91

A lot of philosophers don't

really delve into this at all.

92

But I think the first one

that I know of is Plato.

93

So, I've been reading against some of

the pre Socratic philosophers and I, I

94

have yet to see any of them tackle the

idea of beauty or aesthetics or art.

95

But Plato does and then right after

Plato, his student Aristotle, really

96

develops, a full system of aesthetics.

97

Both of them viewed beauty as

something that points beyond itself.

98

Now.

99

The big difference between Plato

and Aristotle is that Plato

100

diminished the value of human art.

101

In his mindset, art was unvaluable.

102

Why?

103

Well, you have to remember, and

I'm just going to delve into this

104

briefly because we should devote

several episodes to Plato's thought.

105

It was so influential.

106

Not only in philosophy, but in the

Christian worldview and thinking.

107

But in Plato's mindset, there

are two realms, as it were.

108

There is this spiritual slash intellectual

world, and then there's this physical

109

world that you and I exist in right now.

110

And this physical, spiritual

world is composed primarily of

111

what's called forms or ideas.

112

And the best way to think about this

is imagine that you were going to

113

create a horse out of, say, clay or

marble, something like that, right?

114

So what do you have there?

115

You have, according to

Plato, primarily two things.

116

You have the form or the idea of the

horse in your mind, and then you have the

117

material that you're working with, and

those two things combined create then that

118

statue or that figurine of a horse, right?

119

And so, his main point Was that

the forms, the ideas of things

120

were much more important than the

physical expressions of those things.

121

The form of horsiness in your mind is

a million times more important than

122

what you're actually able to produce.

123

Mm-Hmm.

124

And there's a lot of reasons for that.

125

But basically the idea is that each

individual represe is gonna be, defective

126

because the material you're working with.

127

Is not fully, pliant is not fully able

to work with that form to create that.

128

I like that, the, the form of hoarseness.

129

Yeah.

130

In your mind.

131

So you've, so you've got these ideals.

132

Yes.

133

And then you've got the ideal horse

and then every real material horse is.

134

Some sort of imperfect

representation of what the, the,

135

the perfect horse ideal would be.

136

Is that it?

137

Yes.

138

Because the matter is not able to

fully express the, the idea of horses.

139

It has limitations and

that's with everything.

140

Yes.

141

So that's with, you've got a chair here

and that is somehow a representation of

142

the perfect ideal chair that only exists.

143

in our minds, perhaps, or in this other?

144

In this other realm.

145

In this other realm.

146

he does not locate them in the

human mind, but they are in

147

a separate realm, actually.

148

Okay.

149

Now, the other reason that a

physical horse is not as valuable

150

as the idea of hoarseness is that

the physical horse is going to die.

151

So it comes and goes.

152

It's a changeable thing, whereas the idea

of hoarseness is eternal and unchangeable.

153

That's so interesting.

154

But that makes sense why, like, he

would devalue a painting, or a sculpture

155

or something like that, because if I

as a human, I'm going to be closer to

156

that form than a sculpture of a human.

157

Like, that's gonna be a degree

even farther away from what

158

that main ideal would be.

159

That's exactly right, actually.

160

He devalued art because it was a

representation of a representation.

161

So if I'm looking at a horse and then

drawing a picture of that or creating a

162

statue based upon that horse that I see,

that's another step removed from what's

163

really important, the idea of hoarseness.

164

So Aristotle is his disciple,

one of his disciples.

165

Right.

166

And he had a different view on that.

167

He did.

168

On one important thing he

agreed with Plato here.

169

He agreed that any individual thing that

we see here, whether it's a horse or a

170

person or whatever, is this combination

of of form or idea and matter.

171

So you've got the form matter distinction.

172

He agreed with that.

173

His difference, though, was

that, form or the idea as

174

somehow inherent in that object.

175

So it's not off existing in some other

realm, it's within that, and that

176

individual representation, say that

horse, is simply the way that it has

177

outworked as it combines with matter.

178

I'm not saying that quite

right, but that's the idea.

179

So, if I draw a picture of a horse that

is, we'll say good because in essence it's

180

trying to point at the form of the horse.

181

So in and of itself, it has some value

because it's trying to approach that

182

form even if it does it imperfectly.

183

Yeah, very insightful

because that's exactly right.

184

For him, human art is able

to highlight the form.

185

even at the expense of reality

because maybe what you're sculpting

186

doesn't exactly look like that thing.

187

Yeah.

188

But you're creating this idealized,

sculpture or painting in order to

189

bring out the beauty of that form.

190

Now, probably the philosopher that has had

the most influence in terms of aesthetics

191

or beauty is going to be Thomas Aquinas.

192

Okay, and he comes quite a bit later

and from a different perspective.

193

Right.

194

So Aquinas is going to

come a long time later.

195

about 16 centuries after Aristotle.

196

in most of the centuries before then,

Christian thought did not have access

197

to most of the writings of Aristotle.

198

So they had the writings of Plato,

which dramatically influenced Christian

199

thought and Christian theology.

200

But they did not have, in that seminal

period, the first ten centuries of

201

Christian thought, they did not have

broad access to the writings of Aristotle.

202

That's super interesting.

203

So that's another future episode, I

think, as we'll get into the, Yeah.

204

the influence of

Platonism on Christianity.

205

But, so, that was, limited by

archaeological discovery then?

206

Won't go into the history of

it, but a lot of the manuscripts

207

were lost in the western world.

208

but they were preserved in some of

the Arab lands and in the eastern

209

land, and then they were rediscovered.

210

And that changed everything.

211

So, when you look at Augustine,

who up to this point had been

212

the most influential Christian

theologian and Christian thinker.

213

At least in the West.

214

Yes, at least in the West, definitely.

215

What you see is a man who, is synthesizing

Plato with Christian thought in the New

216

Testament or, or the Bible as a whole.

217

When you get to Thomas, who's gonna be in

218

you get to Thomas, what you find is this

creative and fully worked out synthesis

219

of Aristotle with biblical thought.

220

Okay, so just to kind of give us a little

bit of a chronological framework here,

221

when are these guys alive Plato is

going to be dated about 425 BC to 348 BC.

222

So three or four centuries before Christ.

223

And then Aristotle is actually

his student, so subtract

224

about 30 years from that.

225

And then you've got Augustine, who's going

to be the last part of the fourth century.

226

So about 350 to 430.

227

And then you've got St.

228

Thomas, who is right in the

middle of the 13th century.

229

So right in the 1200s.

230

Okay.

231

So St.

232

Thomas is picking up then on the writings

you said of, of Plato or Aristotle?

233

Aristotle.

234

Aristotle, okay.

235

No, let's talk about how

Aquinas developed this.

236

Okay, okay first of all, he's

going to give a definition, which

237

is really not a definition, but

it's as good as you're going to get.

238

So he's going to define beauty

as that which being seen pleases.

239

Beauty is that which being seen pleases.

240

So he doesn't include music in that?

241

Well, I think being seen is broader.

242

what he's trying to get across

is that it brings you pleasure

243

apart from its utility.

244

Okay.

245

Okay.

246

So if I'm enjoying a wonderful meal, part

of that is simply because I'm hungry.

247

I need food, right?

248

In fact, if I'm really hungry, even

a very simple meal say toast and

249

cereal is really pleasurable, right?

250

Yeah.

251

But there are some things that

I don't need, and yet I still

252

find very, very beautiful.

253

I don't need to see a sunset.

254

I don't need to listen to

Bach's, Mass in B minor.

255

But I still find those things

beautiful and pleasurable.

256

They please me, even though they

don't have a utility for me.

257

Ah, okay.

258

So that's what he's trying to get across.

259

When you experience something and it

brings you great pleasure, apart from

260

your need, that's what he says beauty is.

261

That's a super interesting definition.

262

Okay, so, that which being seen pleases.

263

Right.

264

Apart from utility.

265

Yeah.

266

And of course the obvious question

is, alright, so it brings me pleasure.

267

Why?

268

What is it about that?

269

And he would argue, and a lot of this

is then going to be based on Aristotle,

270

he would argue that there are primarily

four things that please us when we

271

see or experience a beautiful object.

272

One is unity, one is proportion,

one is harmony, and the last is the

273

radiance of the form or the essence.

274

Great.

275

Can you unpack each of those?

276

Unity.

277

What does he mean by that?

278

So it brings us pleasure because

it shows or brings forth unity?

279

I think what he means is that all the

pieces fit together in the right way.

280

And it's very much related

then to the idea of harmony.

281

I have a little bit of trouble

understanding the difference he

282

makes between unity and harmony.

283

But I believe it has this idea

that unity shows how all these

284

pieces fit together, and harmony

shows how they all fit together in

285

this harmonious or beautiful way.

286

And then proportion then

would be something like no

287

piece is too big or too small.

288

but they're just right and they are

proportionate towards each other.

289

Okay, and then radiance of form.

290

Yeah, before we get to that, maybe

think of, think of a beautiful face.

291

Alright, so we see a beautiful face.

292

I see one every morning

when I look in the mirror.

293

Oh, wow, okay.

294

Well, never mind about that.

295

When I look at my wife and I see

a beautiful face, what do I see?

296

I see a unity, all the

parts fit together, okay.

297

And then there is a proportion.

298

So, if she had a nose that was 8

inches long, that would be, in most

299

people's mind, a mark against her

beauty, because it's out of proportion.

300

And then there's this harmony,

all the pieces fit together.

301

If one ear was, 2 inches higher

than the other, when you look at

302

someone's face, that's not gonna

be probably beautiful to you.

303

So, I think that's where he

was going at with all of those.

304

That makes sense.

305

Yeah, I can definitely see that.

306

The unity.

307

As a whole, the face looks right and part

of the way it looks right is that the

308

piece is fit to, even, even though an eye

is not an ear, which is not a nose, and

309

which is not a mouth, those harmonize.

310

There's a, there's a

distinctness, yet there's a unity.

311

Yeah.

312

In the way that they work together

and their proportions, their sizes,

313

their distances that make us kind

of in a split second judge, okay,

314

that's a, that's a beautiful face

or that's not a beautiful face.

315

Yeah, I think so.

316

Or think of a horse.

317

It has those same qualifications, right?

318

There is a, a unity of

the hoarseness as a whole.

319

There is this proportion.

320

and there is this harmony

to the body of the horse.

321

If you had a drawing or a statue of

a horse, where the neck was way too

322

big, Or the legs were way too short.

323

We call that a giraffe or a pony.

324

Yeah, right.

325

Or one eye was larger than the other,

or higher or lower than the other.

326

We'd say, okay, that person

probably needs some work there in

327

their, in their artistic ability.

328

So he's kind of giving a rubric

to how to, how to determine if

329

something is beautiful or not.

330

But it, I mean, thinking about

it from the, the 21st century.

331

In which we have all kinds of, you

know, expressionist art or modern

332

art, that this, those may not fit his

necess necessarily fit his criteria.

333

No, I don't think he'd be too

pleased with some of the 20th

334

century paintings especially.

335

Okay.

336

But he is, at least he's giving

a framework, which I think is,

337

helpful because, even if somebody.

338

Doesn't necessarily resonate with

expressionist art or something like

339

that if they see a well painted

picture, or they see a landscape,

340

or they overlook something like

the Grand Canyon, or something.

341

I think that there is a, a beauty

that's intrinsic there, based on

342

its unity and proportion, harmony.

343

Right.

344

And then I think also the last one

plays into that, because sometimes

345

this one can overshadow the others.

346

But if it's strong enough,

we still find it beautiful.

347

And that would be the radiance

of the form or the essence.

348

And this one is really hard to describe.

349

But again, in his mindset, when you

look at any physical thing, what you

350

are looking at is this combination

of the matter, the material that it's

351

made out of, whether it's wood, or

ivory, or gold, or marble, or whatever,

352

and then the form, the idea in that

person's mind, or as he would put it,

353

in God's mind, about what that thing

is, what that thing should look like.

354

So that was the big shift between,

say, Plato and Aristotle, and then

355

you get into Christian theology.

356

They still had, at this point at least,

the idea that there were two realms.

357

The realm of forms or ideas

and the realm of matter.

358

But the ideas and the forms were not

just in this, realm out somewhere

359

that we can't experience and can't

have access to, but rather, they

360

are actually in the mind of God.

361

Okay.

362

That's, that's a really interesting shift.

363

Right.

364

And therefore, because of that,

it gives this intrinsic nobility

365

to these forms, in a way.

366

Gotcha.

367

That we'll come back to.

368

But, so I talked about Van Gogh.

369

If you look at Van Gogh just as an

artist, with his sense of, proportion

370

and harmony, uh, yeah, you're gonna

have a few strikes against him.

371

But at the same time, he and some

of the, impressionists that came a

372

little bit after him, I think do such

a wonderful job of showing the form

373

or the essence of something, at least

to me, your mileage may vary, that I

374

don't really care as much about those.

375

Because here I'm seeing something

I don't usually see anywhere else.

376

I'm seeing someone who is able to express

in physical ways the form and the goodness

377

of this thing that they're looking at.

378

Whether that's a person,

or a field, or a mountain.

379

So your criteria isn't how well

that thing corresponds to reality.

380

Your criteria is exactly what they were

getting after, which is, I don't want

381

to just show this, I want to show the

emotion, perhaps, or the, the feel that

382

this landscape or person should evoke.

383

Right.

384

it was called, Impressionism, right?

385

that was actually a label given

to it by someone who wanted

386

to denigrate the movement.

387

I think better impressionism

should be called expressionism.

388

Because two things are happening here.

389

One, I think for Van Gogh, at least

in some of the early impressionists,

390

sometimes he's called an impressionist,

sometimes not, they're trying to

391

express Now, I think for some of the

later Impressionists, they're actually

392

trying to express how they feel

about that, which is very different.

393

We call them both Impressionists,

again, I think Expressionism is a better

394

word, but one is trying to express

the beauty of the form or the idea of

395

that thing and its meaning and value.

396

And the other is more,

much more subjective.

397

This is how I feel about this.

398

And I think that is the, the really big

shift in art of the last 150 years or so.

399

When I'm looking at Van Gogh, I'm

seeing someone who's trying to

400

express what's objectively there.

401

When I look at some of the later ones,

uh, for example, Monet, but especially

402

the people who came in the 20th century,

I'm seeing someone who's trying to express

403

their own feelings about what they see.

404

Now it could be wrong, I'm not an art

expert, but that's, that's how I view

405

the shift in 20th century art especially.

406

So you think that there's something just

innately beautiful that Van Gogh's able

407

to capture in showing, like, uh, I got

some of his paintings in my head, but

408

I don't remember what they're called.

409

But there's the one of the man who's

sitting on the chair who's sorrowful.

410

Yeah.

411

It's very famous.

412

Or Starry Night or something, where

he's trying to show the innate, beauty

413

of that particular, Let's take the man.

414

Who's sitting on the

chair who's sorrowful.

415

I think that's one of

the more popular ones.

416

Like, he's trying to not just show kind

of how he's perceiving that, but the

417

innate feeling impression of that scene.

418

Right.

419

He is trying to express

visually what grief is.

420

Yeah.

421

Or when you see Starry Night.

422

Probably his most famous painting.

423

And I won't quibble.

424

To me it's not necessarily

my favorite out of his.

425

But it's a great painting.

426

Obviously, the stars were not that large.

427

They did not swirl like that.

428

But he is creating this scene where

he is trying to get at the beauty of

429

that beyond what a photograph or a

hyper realistic painting could do.

430

Yeah.

431

And it got me back to Aquinas.

432

I think Aquinas would be okay with that.

433

I think I'm okay with that because I

feel like there is some objective worth

434

or beauty or value in what he's seen.

435

And he's trying to convey that.

436

There are some things that

express the radiance of the form.

437

Talk about natural beauty.

438

I'll shift back to that for

a minute instead of art.

439

I believe when we look at the

natural world, we see, often,

440

unity and proportion and harmony.

441

But even more than that, we see the

radiance of something beyond itself.

442

Maybe not a form, but an idea

of something very, very real.

443

And, for me at least, those are all

connected to the greatness and the

444

wonder and the mystery of God himself.

445

That this physical world that we

see has this inherent beauty and

446

wonder because it is the creative

expression of the ultimate mind, the

447

mysterious mind, beyond all things.

448

So, when I look at, for example, a Grand

Canyon or a mountain, what do I see?

449

Among other things, there

is a sense of majesty.

450

And there's a sense of putting me

in the right place, the proportion.

451

I am a very small thing,

next to a mountain.

452

Yeah, that's a very interesting feeling.

453

Why, why, why do we have that,

like, where does that come from?

454

I don't know exactly where that comes

from, other than the fact that the,

455

understanding and experiencing the size

differential between me and this majestic

456

thing maybe is an echo of the great

difference It's the great qualitative

457

difference between myself and God, that

his majesty and his wonder and his wisdom

458

and his power are like that mountain

and I'm like this person standing next

459

to it that you can barely even see.

460

I think it's probably something like that,

that when we experience the beauty of this

461

natural world, we are experiencing that

as pleasurable because the deepest part

462

of this, it's made in the image of God.

463

And understanding some

things intuitively about God.

464

We get that.

465

There is a majesty here that is not human.

466

It's not limited to me

or even all humanity.

467

It goes far beyond that.

468

And there's a part of me, there's

a part of me that wants that.

469

Hmm.

470

I feel like it's tough because

sometimes I feel kind of numb.

471

Like, you know, There's a song by a band

that I like that says something along the

472

lines of like, they say a picture is worth

a thousand words, but now I just like,

473

get a thousand pictures on my phone as

I scroll throughout my day or something.

474

It's kind of numb to the effect of

seeing beauty because it's just so

475

prevalent through, Instagram or whatever.

476

but when I'm not numb to it.

477

Yeah.

478

there is something about seeing

either things that are really big.

479

Like a mountain or even, you know, down

in Brown County State Park, overlooking

480

the forest, especially during the fall

with all the colors, or sometimes seeing

481

pictures like, you know, the Hubble,

new Hubble telescope images, all the

482

color and the movement of the galaxies

that are just like specks, and there's

483

a sense of awe there, but then also in

the really small things, like looking

484

at the intricate details of a flower,

Or an, insect or something like that,

485

that both somehow evoke, an emotion

of like, Wow, that is really good.

486

and I think that that, to me points to,

Okay, these are creative expressions

487

of a creator god who is innately,

good, and beautiful, and creative.

488

And so, there's a way in which

those things radiate, in my mind,

489

the glory and majesty of God.

490

Yeah.

491

Yeah, I get that.

492

I'm glad you pointed out about seeing

very small things, because they're

493

the other side of the scale, right?

494

We see something incredibly small,

and yet We see the beauty in that.

495

We see the fineness of the details

and how they all work together.

496

Oh, it's incredible.

497

Yeah.

498

And I think it reminds us again

of our place within this vast

499

scale of the universe, scaling

both up and down with wonders.

500

Yeah, and I mean, I'm just thinking about

the unity and harmony something like DNA.

501

Yeah.

502

You know, where it is all unified because

it's one thing, but the complexity That

503

works harmoniously together in order to

create the form that DNA is different,

504

or did you see the article about the

smallest animal, based on scientific

505

criteria that lives on the moon are

those like micro bears things that they

506

think are probably were on the space.

507

ships that landed.

508

Did you see that?

509

I did not micro bears.

510

They're like tiny little tiny little

microbe, but they look like bears.

511

And so they're called, you

should Google it real fast.

512

I think they call micro bears,

but, this is going to be an

513

interesting podcast listeners.

514

You're welcome.

515

We're talking about

micro bears on the moon.

516

All right.

517

I'm Googling it.

518

Yeah.

519

You see him?

520

Um, I haven't seen pictures yet.

521

On April 11, 2019, the Israeli spacecraft

Bereshit, I think I'm pronouncing that

522

probably wrongly, crashed into the

moon during a failed landing attempt.

523

No, its payload included a few thousand

tardigrades, also known as water bears.

524

Yeah, that's it.

525

Initial reports suggested they could

have survived the crash landing.

526

Yeah, see if you can

see some images of it.

527

Oh yeah, those are bizarre looking.

528

Well, they're, they're microscopic.

529

The point of this though, is that

they like the article I read said

530

that, what's the point of this again?

531

The point is that the article I

read, classified them somehow as

532

animals but that they're so small,

the intricacy of the detail of them

533

and their resilience that makes

scientists think that they can live.

534

In outer space, in the

vacuum of outer space.

535

there's something magnificent about

that and beautiful about that.

536

That is just intriguing, but at most much

more than that, just like fascinating

537

because something like that exists.

538

Yeah.

539

Yeah, that's interesting.

540

Um.

541

I'm sorry.

542

Maybe a tangent.

543

Absolutely a tangent.

544

That's all right.

545

That's all right.

546

So anyway, where were we?

547

Okay, so Aquinas, radiance of the form

of the essence, we've talked about that.

548

Now, I do want to talk about, oh

by the way, we should also mention

549

Psalm 19 talks about this idea.

550

The heavens display the glory of God.

551

The Skyes show his handiwork.

552

And then it goes on to talk about the

beauty of this world, and especially the

553

world above us that we see in the sky.

554

And then it's interesting that same

Psalm, first half talks about the

555

wonders of God's creation, and then

the second half of that goes right

556

into talking about the law of the

Lord or God's moral instruction.

557

Hmm.

558

It seems to tie those in together,

like both of those are an expression

559

of who God is in different ways.

560

Alright that leads me to

talking just very briefly about

561

the three transcendentals.

562

What's that word mean?

563

so transcendental just means

the things that go beyond.

564

So if you remember in the very first

podcast episode we talked about imagine

565

if we had a terrarium or an aquarium that

represented the entire physical universe.

566

And the question is, is

there anything outside this?

567

Is there anything beyond that transcends

the physical universe that we're in?

568

And the theist would say, yes, God and

all the things about God, whereas the

569

natural says no, the physical cosmos is

all that there is and never has been.

570

So the idea of transcendence

means something that is

571

here, but it goes beyond.

572

Or even in this room.

573

You and I are in an office,

maybe 15 by 20, right?

574

And yet there are things

that transcend this.

575

For example, rationality transcends this,

because even if we weren't here, there's

576

still rationality within this world.

577

And sunlight transcends this, because

it's coming in that window right now.

578

Many things transcend this.

579

The point is, just to define

what we mean by transcendence.

580

Now, there are three transcendentals

in classical philosophical thought.

581

I'm going to be relying on Peter

Kreft, who's a great professor of

582

philosophy at Boston University.

583

Fascinating.

584

Find his lectures, you can listen to

him, and he's much better than I am.

585

A thousand times better.

586

But anyway, he talks about

the three transcendentals.

587

The good, the true, and the beautiful.

588

The good transcends this world.

589

There is a goodness that exists

before and beyond creation itself.

590

And also the true.

591

There is a truth.

592

that transcends this world that we're in.

593

So if you and I were not here, if humanity

isn't here, if humanity as a whole had

594

never existed, there is still truth.

595

And then lastly, the beautiful.

596

So there are things that are beautiful.

597

that don't depend upon

us or our judgments.

598

They're beautiful in themselves.

599

They transcend our judgments, or even our

world, because they're part of who God is.

600

So that's what I mean by

the three transcendentals.

601

So you're defining transcendental

as they exist even without

602

humans needing to exist.

603

Yes, or even the universe.

604

Or even, oh, even the universe.

605

Okay.

606

So The beautiful can exist even

without the universe existing?

607

Mm hmm.

608

Because of the va I mean, I feel

like those are very material things.

609

Yeah, okay.

610

I see what you're getting at, and

maybe we should say that beauty is a

611

transcendental because relies on things

that are not part of this universe.

612

Like the mind of God?

613

Yeah.

614

Okay.

615

So that, that's a good pushback on that.

616

I appreciate that.

617

Yeah, I'm just thinking.

618

Well, we're limited by our senses.

619

So I perceive beauty based on the,

the physical expressions of that.

620

So if there is no material

expression of that, then that seems

621

like that would be hard to exist.

622

Mm hmm.

623

Yeah, I get that.

624

Maybe, uh, when we talk about the next

part, that will flesh it out a little bit.

625

and again, I'm relying on Peter Krepp

for this distinction, but I think

626

it's very helpful, very fascinating.

627

Three transcendentals.

628

The good, the true, and the beautiful.

629

These are recognized all the way

back from Plato, as these things are

630

what we are infinitely attracted to.

631

We always want these things, and

we're, we don't want just a bit

632

of truth, or a bit of beauty.

633

We want all that we can experience,

all that we can take in.

634

So it's not like food, it's

not like something here that

635

we can be satiated with.

636

we have an infinite inborn

desire for these things.

637

True, the good, and the beautiful.

638

Now, he makes a distinction, Peter

Krep makes a distinction between

639

the order of being, how these things

relate to each other in the order of

640

being, and the order of attraction.

641

But they're all based on God and his ways.

642

So the order of being

is, first of all, God.

643

God and his ways and his

thoughts and his values are the

644

ultimate expression of reality.

645

They exist apart from

this physical universe.

646

If this physical universe stopped

existing, or if it never had existed,

647

still God and his ways are there.

648

So, he is the ultimate

reality, the ultimate being.

649

And then truth, then, is

what corresponds to reality.

650

So you have reality, you have

probably different levels of

651

reality, different facets of reality.

652

A shadow or a dream is not as real as

you, who created the shadow or the dream.

653

You are not as real, in a

sense, as God himself, because

654

you are contingent upon him.

655

But there are, there are real things.

656

The true is what corresponds to reality.

657

So it's almost like, it's that

reality put into concepts and words.

658

The good is the right response to reality.

659

And that's, mainly morality?

660

It includes morality, but it

goes beyond that, I think.

661

So it's like the right response to

reality if something, like family

662

is more valuable than that chair?

663

So I should value my fam, I should respond

differently to my family than to my chair?

664

Yes.

665

Kind of thing.

666

Okay.

667

Let me give you a couple examples of this.

668

Okay.

669

Thanks.

670

Because mine is not good.

671

No, it's actually not bad.

672

if Christianity is true, you have God in

his ways, and then you have the truth that

673

flows out of that reality, including the

ideas, for example, that lying is wrong.

674

Okay.

675

So the good then is that I try

to be an honest person because of

676

that truth, that lying is wrong.

677

Or, if God is who he says he is in the

Bible, and he is a being of ultimate

678

love, then ultimately I should love other

rational beings that I come in contact

679

with, above my own physical desires.

680

So I should prefer to love my wife

and do what's right for her rather

681

than my own fleshly desires, even if

I were in a position to, say, commit

682

adultery or something like that.

683

All right.

684

So in that case, the truth is

That my wife is infinitely more

685

valuable than the momentary

pleasure that that would bring me.

686

The good is then realizing

that in my, decision making.

687

So I'm not going to put myself in

positions where I'm going to do that.

688

Or even, if possible, be

tempted to do that too much.

689

Hmm.

690

And then, finally, the beautiful

is simply the expression of these

691

things within this universe somehow.

692

First, I put down the physical

expression, but physical would

693

maybe exclude the idea of music.

694

Music is physical, right?

695

But I think to make it clear,

we'll just say beauty is the

696

expression of that reality within

our world that we experience.

697

So, things aren't good or

beautiful just because God says

698

they are, in this perspective.

699

Things are good and beautiful

because God's nature is true

700

and good and beautiful, and the

fullest expression of reality.

701

And so then I could see how truth

corresponds with God, and then

702

good corresponds also with what is

true, which corresponds with God.

703

And then beauty corresponds with what

is good, which corresponds with what is

704

true, which also corresponds with God.

705

There's definitely a flow here

that all kind of corresponds with

706

how we think and understand God.

707

Yes.

708

That's what I'm trying to get at.

709

And that, again, I'm

basing this on Peter Kreft.

710

This isn't original.

711

that's the idea.

712

That the transcendentals are linked to

each other and ultimately grounded in God.

713

Ultimately grounded in God.

714

that is good because that gets at the

heart of what we've been trying to do

715

as we've explored different world views.

716

Is that there's an internal

coherence and this kind of shows.

717

Because what is true is epistemology.

718

What is real is metaphysics, and then

what is good and what is beautiful

719

are your value theory, your ethics.

720

So, I mean, it's So, yeah, God

and his ways would be ontology

721

or metaphysics, what is real.

722

Yeah.

723

And then the true would be epistemology.

724

The good would be, probably you would

regard that as value theory, and then

725

the beautiful is one part of that.

726

Yeah.

727

If you're gonna make that into,

the different realms of philosophy

728

as we've been talking about.

729

Yeah.

730

Now, what's interesting here, is

that the order of attraction is

731

different than the order of being.

732

The order of being is God, and then

the true, the good, and the beautiful.

733

But the order of attraction

for us, the way that we

734

experience things, is reversed.

735

We experience the beautiful, which

should then point us towards the good.

736

Which should then point us towards

the true, and then through that

737

we see and experience God more.

738

That's so fascinating.

739

Right.

740

And I think he's right about this.

741

Um, I've thought about this for a while.

742

He's a lot smarter than me, so it

took me a while to think through this,

743

but I think he's right about that.

744

We can get to know God then through

what is beautiful and what is good.

745

And what is true.

746

And what is true.

747

Right.

748

Wow.

749

The order of being is God and God's ways.

750

And then the true, the

good, and the beautiful.

751

But the order of our attraction, the

way that we normally experience things,

752

is the beautiful and then the good.

753

And then the true, pointed to God.

754

And that's the way I think

it's supposed to work.

755

So that's why when I see something very,

very beautiful in nature especially, I

756

see it and I experience it as beauty.

757

But at the same time, there

is a goodness to that.

758

It's not just that I like the

beauty, it just seems good.

759

And it seems right.

760

It seems truthful.

761

That there is this beautiful

thing that I'm experiencing.

762

That points beyond itself to the

majesty of the one who made it.

763

So, something like that.

764

That, that, I mean, Aristotle seemed to

be pretty spot on then, in that sense

765

that those things that are beautiful do

point to something beyond themselves.

766

Yeah.

767

Did you mean Aristotle or Thomas?

768

Well, both, I guess.

769

Yeah.

770

Thomas is pointing that to God, but

Aristotle is also right in the sense

771

that he recognizes that the beautiful

thing points to something beyond itself.

772

It radiates some other form.

773

Thomas putting that in the nature of God,

I think, is the helpful critique there.

774

Or expansion.

775

Yeah, that's a good point.

776

Thank you.

777

Alright, well, we could develop

this more, and maybe we will.

778

But I want to talk about the

alternative here from a naturalistic

779

perspective because I think it

highlights the beauty and the meaning

780

of what we've just talked about.

781

But it also shows into sharp relief

the worldview that you get with

782

naturalism versus the worldview

that you get with Christianity.

783

So, yeah.

784

why don't you help unpack,

then, kind of how the naturalist

785

perspective would understand beauty?

786

All right.

787

Most of them don't touch it.

788

Really?

789

Yeah.

790

Because it's a difficult concept,

even in the best of terms.

791

But especially once you eliminate God

and transcendence, really, you have a

792

difficult time accounting for beauty.

793

the standard way, then, that you have

to default to, If you believe, as a

794

naturalist does, that there is nothing

that transcends this physical universe,

795

that we are here pretty much as an

accidental collocations of atoms, as

796

Bertram Russell put it, that we are here

solely by unguided natural selection,

797

that's, that's how we are shaped,

including our mind, therefore our sense

798

of beauty, then ultimately what happens

Is the only theory of aesthetics that

799

you have is that you value some things

because you were shaped by natural

800

selection alone to value those things.

801

That's the only game in town.

802

So how would natural selection

shape people's values?

803

especially beauty?

804

Yeah.

805

Okay, so let's take this in two fold.

806

One, why do we find

beautiful people attractive?

807

And then secondly, why do we

find natural beauty attractive?

808

I think the beautiful people

one, we can understand.

809

the argument here that the

naturalist makes is that beauty

810

is a visible expression of the

reproductive health of that person.

811

Okay.

812

So when I see someone beautiful, it's

not that I am valuing them simply because

813

they might reproduce more of my genes.

814

it's not like that.

815

But rather, my mind has been shaped by

generation and generation, thousands of

816

generations to value certain traits that

my ancestors found increased fertility

817

and evolutionary fitness, therefore.

818

So, for example, a woman who has long,

luxurious hair, well, at least in ancient

819

times, or previous generations, many times

past, that was a sign of good health.

820

And you'd want a, woman

who had good health.

821

What we associate with youthfulness, like

clear skin, lack of wrinkles, a firm body.

822

Well, obviously, from an evolutionary

perspective, if you're looking at,

823

say, a 20 year old woman versus a

70 year old woman, the 20 year old

824

woman has those characteristics

and the 70 year old woman doesn't.

825

And only the 20 year old woman is actually

going to be able to bear you children.

826

So, Your mind has been shaped to

value certain characteristics.

827

Even in men.

828

Okay.

829

I'm a man.

830

I can look at another man and view

him as attractive because he has

831

certain masculine characteristics that

really show his evolutionary fitness.

832

Even though I have no desire,

obviously, to mate with him and could

833

produce children with him anyway.

834

It's just this idea there are certain,

especially feminine characteristics

835

that show high, levels of estrogen

and reproductive fitness in youth.

836

And the masculine characteristics

that show high levels of

837

testosterone and strength.

838

So strength for protection as

well, and things that can help.

839

So that's why women might find men

of certain physical physiques more

840

attractive, is because over time they've

been conditioned to see, not just that

841

they can, help them have children, but

that they can protect them and, Different

842

competitive situations or something?

843

Okay.

844

So they can get more resources

and they can protect.

845

Interesting.

846

Okay.

847

Now, undergirding all this

is not some plan of God.

848

It's simply the expression of

your genes to want to reproduce.

849

Okay.

850

So, the selfish gene, as Richard Dawkins

calls it, and Steven Pinker picks that up.

851

The selfish gene within you wants to

reproduce and it will choose things, value

852

things, based upon that desire alone.

853

Now.

854

I said most naturalists don't

really touch the concept of beauty.

855

One who does is Steven Pinker.

856

So, we've quoted him before.

857

he's a professor of psychology right

now, but he's done most of his more

858

famous work in the field of science,

popular science and evolutionary theory,

859

as an evolutionary biologist So, he's

trying to interpret the human mind.

860

Based upon natural selection alone.

861

And he does this probably in a more

convincing and certainly more thorough

862

way than any other naturalist I've seen.

863

he wrote a book called How the Mind Works.

864

It's one of the few that I've seen,

actually the only one I've seen from

865

a naturalist that delves into the idea

of how natural selection would have

866

selected for what we find beautiful.

867

for example, this part doesn't necessarily

deal with beauty, but human valuing.

868

You have a baby now, don't you?

869

We do, yeah.

870

I bet you think you love that baby.

871

Actually, he's ten months old today.

872

Ten months old.

873

Well, still a baby.

874

Yeah.

875

So, I bet you think that you love him.

876

I, I'm pretty sure I love him.

877

Okay, maybe.

878

Stephen Picker writes, We now understand

why many animals, including humans, love

879

their children, parents, and grandparents.

880

These individuals share the same genes,

and the genes are manipulating the meat

881

puppets, that's you, to protect the genes.

882

when a mother watching her son enter

surgery wishes she could take his

883

place, it's not the species or the

group or her body that wants her to

884

have this most unselfish emotion.

885

It is her selfish genes.

886

So, the reason that you love your

child is because he shares your genes.

887

And you are wired by your selfish genes to

want to protect that process by which he

888

can pass it down to further generations.

889

That's so interesting.

890

Yeah.

891

And that also comes then

in, in romantic love.

892

you would think that maybe You would

view that woman as you would have

893

some choice in loving her because

of their internal worth, right?

894

Yeah., But Steven Pinker writes that

if your choice was purely rational,

895

then the object of your desire

could predict that by the law of

896

averages, someone better would come

around sooner or later, and that you

897

would dump them like a hot potato.

898

But it's clear that your choice is

partly I'm going to read this again

899

because I want to get the quote.

900

So he says that if your choice were purely

rational, then, quote, then the object

901

of your desire could predict that by the

law of averages, someone better would

902

come around sooner or later, and that

you would dumb them like a hot potato.

903

But if it's clear that your choice

is partly involuntary, partly

904

directed to that unique individual

as opposed to that individual's list

905

of qualities, that gives your partner

some assurance that you're committed.

906

So basically what he's saying is, you

don't really have a choice in choosing

907

to love the woman that you love.

908

It's also this expression, and it's

mostly involuntary, and that by

909

itself, it kind of gives her and you

the assurance that it will stick.

910

So it's deterministic based on my biology.

911

Yeah, he's pretty deterministic, because

he's a very consistent naturalist.

912

That's so interesting.

913

But, what's he saying then, that by the

law of averages, sooner or later as my

914

wife and I grow older, there is going

to be a younger woman who is more fit

915

to bear children than my wife will be.

916

But, He's saying that the reason

I don't drop her like a hot potato

917

and take up this other woman is why?

918

Well, partly because it's not a

voluntary choice that you love

919

and are committed to your wife.

920

It's not a rational choice.

921

It's subconscious.

922

It's working on the gene level instead

of the intellectual value level.

923

But how does the gene level

help in that situation if I want

924

to, uh, what's the right word?

925

Propagate my genetics?

926

I think he would say that it does

so by creating strong human bonds

927

that consistently raise children

and grandchildren over generations.

928

Okay, so, so it's more, it's more

about trying to help continue the

929

evolutionary fitness of my family because

my son now has my genes, and he still

930

needs the family dynamics in order

to grow and be an evolutionarily fit.

931

Human who's continuing

to, spread the genes.

932

Yes.

933

Okay, I mean that's an argument for sure.

934

It is.

935

That makes sense.

936

Yeah, it's an argument.

937

I think probably evolutionary theory

about why we value beautiful people

938

is stronger than the natural part.

939

Um, but again, notice the difference here.

940

You are choosing someone because

involuntarily your genes I have latched

941

onto that person as the person most

likely at this stage of your life to

942

be able to produce a lot of offspring.

943

Now that's very different than the

human idea, that when we see someone,

944

we have a real choice in that, and

we value them for things beyond

945

just their reproductive fitness.

946

Yeah, it's kind of, it's, his

perspective is a little cynical.

947

It is.

948

And he's married, isn't he?

949

At least he was.

950

I think he's married.

951

I have no idea.

952

No?

953

Okay.

954

but I know as a parent of an adopted

child, a lot of this rings false.

955

Ah.

956

Can you say more?

957

Well, yeah.

958

Obviously, we have chosen to devote

the incredible amount of resources

959

it takes to raising a child, uh, two

biological children and one adopted child.

960

And we did that willingly, as

almost all adoptive parents do.

961

So that idea of adoption and the altruism.

962

of adoption, altruism in general,

is very difficult to explain

963

on evolutionary terms alone.

964

Yeah, that's interesting.

965

But I don't want to digress on that.

966

Can, can I just say props to him

for using meat puppet though?

967

That's just been in my mind.

968

Uh, that's right, right?

969

He said meat puppet?

970

Yeah.

971

He called me a meat puppet?

972

Yes, he did.

973

And his academic work, that's

what, 600, 700 pages long?

974

Yes, and in fact, I think Richard

Dawkins expressed it best.

975

I think it was him who said this

verse that your body is just your

976

genes way of creating more genes.

977

Huh.

978

So you are a meat puppet.

979

I like that.

980

Yeah.

981

I like that.

982

The puppet master is your genes.

983

At first I was thinking the puppet master,

does that point to a puppeteer, like

984

a god, but he's, he's not saying that.

985

He's just saying that I

am a passive responsive.

986

I don't know if you put a passive

responsive, but yeah, the idea

987

is basically your body, including

the choices you make are.

988

Being puppeteered, is that the right word?

989

Yeah, I think so.

990

By your, by your genes.

991

That's so interesting.

992

Your genes desire for

reproduction, specifically.

993

What a fascinating, You know what the

thing is though, I I don't mean to

994

digress, but there's certainly shades of

truth to wanting to continue to love our

995

families, and some of that is certainly

grounded in genes and in, Biology and

996

that sort of thing that, yeah, I want

to protect my family because they are

997

family and part of family is not just

a societal bond but a genetic bond.

998

So I, I could certainly see shades

of truth to their, to their credit

999

that there is probably something

working at the genetic level for this.

00:50:18,738 --> 00:50:22,068

Yeah, I'm glad you point that out

because I think you're probably right.

00:50:22,105 --> 00:50:25,385

there are some parts of this that are

true or they're true to a certain degree.

00:50:25,988 --> 00:50:30,848

And remember, for a Christian theist like

you and I, we are able to fit that into

00:50:30,848 --> 00:50:32,618

our understanding of reality quite well.

00:50:33,108 --> 00:50:37,688

We would just say, this is how God

used part of the human process of

00:50:37,748 --> 00:50:39,518

evolution as he guided it along.

00:50:39,978 --> 00:50:44,098

So I can be a six day creationist or I

can be a theistic evolutionist, someone

00:50:44,208 --> 00:50:45,608

who believes God used that process.

00:50:45,938 --> 00:50:47,648

Either way, I'm still a theist, right?

00:50:47,838 --> 00:50:48,128

Yeah.

00:50:48,168 --> 00:50:49,758

Philosophically, I'm in the same camp.

00:50:50,235 --> 00:50:54,395

But if I am An atheist, if I'm a

naturalist, I don't have that option.

00:50:55,155 --> 00:50:59,395

This is, natural selection, unguided

natural selection, is the only

00:50:59,395 --> 00:51:03,885

game in town for discerning how

we became who we are and why we

00:51:03,885 --> 00:51:05,165

value the things that we value.

00:51:05,925 --> 00:51:06,375

Interesting.

00:51:06,565 --> 00:51:06,965

Interesting.

00:51:08,235 --> 00:51:08,785

All right.

00:51:08,945 --> 00:51:11,385

One other thing, Steven

Pinker talks about it again.

00:51:11,635 --> 00:51:16,437

Full props to him for talking about

this from his perspective when most

00:51:16,447 --> 00:51:18,397

naturalists just kind of punt here.

00:51:18,957 --> 00:51:22,217

And that is why we value

natural beauty, all right?

00:51:22,217 --> 00:51:24,147

And some of this is going

to apply to art as well.

00:51:24,732 --> 00:51:28,702

And basically, it's the same mechanism,

just working in a different way.

00:51:29,322 --> 00:51:34,122

So the same mechanism is that your

genes want to reproduce themselves

00:51:34,322 --> 00:51:37,032

and continue their reproduction on

through many generations, right?

00:51:37,647 --> 00:51:38,787

That is the mechanism.

00:51:39,577 --> 00:51:42,497

The way it works for natural beauty

is a little bit different than the

00:51:42,497 --> 00:51:45,217

beauty of a potential spouse or mate.

00:51:46,067 --> 00:51:48,567

But it's the same

naturalistic explanation.

00:51:49,117 --> 00:51:51,757

So, he devotes several pages to this.

00:51:52,247 --> 00:51:56,751

He says that, for most of human history,

humans evolved on the African savannah.

00:51:57,671 --> 00:52:02,754

And that this type of environment,

then becomes associated with what we

00:52:02,754 --> 00:52:07,834

desire because it gave evolutionary

advantages to our ancestors.

00:52:08,344 --> 00:52:11,604

In other words, the people who

formed what we value today through

00:52:11,604 --> 00:52:13,014

those many, many generations.

00:52:13,538 --> 00:52:14,628

what advantages are those?

00:52:14,668 --> 00:52:16,418

Well, you have wide vistas, right?

00:52:16,778 --> 00:52:21,028

So you can see potential predators

coming at you and you can see prey.

00:52:22,093 --> 00:52:25,243

So we would now view landscapes as

something kind of innately beautiful.

00:52:25,273 --> 00:52:25,753

Exactly.

00:52:25,893 --> 00:52:26,203

Okay.

00:52:27,023 --> 00:52:27,203

Yeah.

00:52:27,203 --> 00:52:33,200

So wide open areas and then, he would talk

about why we value animals and why we find

00:52:33,230 --> 00:52:37,530

animals, beautiful, because we eat them or

sometimes we're eaten by them, but either

00:52:37,530 --> 00:52:39,140

way, we have to pay attention to them.

00:52:39,490 --> 00:52:42,690

And that's the idea that we have

to pay attention to these things.

00:52:42,690 --> 00:52:45,420

Therefore, they're kind of

hardwired into our mind that this

00:52:45,420 --> 00:52:46,880

is something we want to look at.

00:52:48,040 --> 00:52:49,370

And what about flowers?

00:52:49,440 --> 00:52:51,620

Alright, we all find

flowers beautiful, right?

00:52:51,930 --> 00:52:55,350

most people do, and again, it's

a very naturalistic explanation.

00:52:56,050 --> 00:53:00,126

Well, you have to remember that

in the underbrush, different

00:53:00,126 --> 00:53:01,246

plants have different properties.

00:53:01,256 --> 00:53:03,646

Some could kill you, some would

heal you, some would feed you.

00:53:03,891 --> 00:53:06,620

And they're all going to be

green, except for the flowers.

00:53:06,630 --> 00:53:09,311

That's how you're going to distinguish

them, at least at first glance.

00:53:09,876 --> 00:53:13,166

Therefore, the more you paid

attention to flowers, the more

00:53:13,166 --> 00:53:16,687

likely you were to succeed in that

environment and pass on your genes.

00:53:17,057 --> 00:53:19,496

So it's very utilitarian.

00:53:19,806 --> 00:53:20,306

Exactly.

00:53:20,896 --> 00:53:25,009

Which is interesting because then

it's no longer in the realm of beauty.

00:53:25,009 --> 00:53:27,665

it's mostly just, oh well, you

had to pay attention to this

00:53:27,665 --> 00:53:30,385

for evolutionary, fitness.

00:53:30,652 --> 00:53:31,012

Yes.

00:53:31,265 --> 00:53:34,862

Okay, now what about something

like, um, a sunset or the sky?

00:53:35,469 --> 00:53:37,679

Yeah, he gives no

explanation at all for that.

00:53:38,199 --> 00:53:41,669

I wonder if he would say something like

meteors or, or something like that.

00:53:42,099 --> 00:53:44,259

I'm sorry, he does give

an explanation for that.

00:53:44,679 --> 00:53:48,719

I remember now, he argued that

dramatic shifts in weather or

00:53:48,749 --> 00:53:52,556

cosmological events signaled

something that we had to respond to.

00:53:52,566 --> 00:53:56,805

And the more we paid attention to those

things, the more likely we were to

00:53:56,825 --> 00:53:58,765

survive and therefore pass on our genes.

00:53:59,468 --> 00:54:04,487

he also has a little bit about

why we value mystery and beauty.

00:54:04,967 --> 00:54:08,507

So one of the things that most

humans desire or find beautiful

00:54:08,507 --> 00:54:10,137

is a winding path, right?

00:54:10,837 --> 00:54:15,647

Or a brook that goes into a mountain,

or rolling hills that we can't see past.

00:54:16,417 --> 00:54:20,474

And he would say that we value those

things because our evolutionary

00:54:20,474 --> 00:54:26,244

ancestors, the ones that had this

sense of seeking out the unknown,

00:54:26,674 --> 00:54:28,564

had this evolutionary advantage then.

00:54:29,554 --> 00:54:30,294

Oh, interesting.

00:54:30,454 --> 00:54:30,704

Yeah.

00:54:31,254 --> 00:54:32,684

Now, a couple of things about this.

00:54:33,254 --> 00:54:35,564

First of all, this is a just so story.

00:54:35,644 --> 00:54:39,639

And what I mean by that You're making

up an explanation for something that

00:54:39,649 --> 00:54:42,069

you could in no wise test or prove.

00:54:42,529 --> 00:54:46,160

In fact, he's, he was called out by

this, by other people of his same camp

00:54:46,160 --> 00:54:52,120

saying, there's no way we can know how

millions of years ago individuals or

00:54:52,120 --> 00:54:55,780

groups lived on the savanna, what they

valued, what they chose, what they did.

00:54:56,860 --> 00:54:58,800

There's no scientific way to test this.

00:54:59,450 --> 00:55:04,176

He quotes some study saying that

children prefer savannas above

00:55:04,176 --> 00:55:06,706

other types of environments

that they wanted to travel to.

00:55:07,106 --> 00:55:08,936

But he gives no citation for that at all.

00:55:08,986 --> 00:55:10,956

So there's no way to test that hypothesis.

00:55:11,386 --> 00:55:15,183

In any case, he, right after he

concedes that adults like mountains

00:55:15,233 --> 00:55:19,613

and woodlands just as much, he says,

well, maybe we experience those more.

00:55:19,933 --> 00:55:23,663

So again, he's just giving these

suppositions on why these things might be.

00:55:24,153 --> 00:55:27,453

But I think from your own experience,

I mean, think of the people you know.

00:55:28,608 --> 00:55:30,918

If you ask them, where do you

want to spend a two week vacation?

00:55:32,288 --> 00:55:35,058

What percentage of them are

going to say, on a savanna?

00:55:36,498 --> 00:55:42,128

I feel like it's like, it's like, would

you prefer, yeah, mountains or the beach?

00:55:42,168 --> 00:55:42,508

Right.

00:55:43,538 --> 00:55:44,458

Savanna, yeah, yeah.

00:55:44,538 --> 00:55:48,551

A woodland lake, a mountain, a beach.

00:55:48,641 --> 00:55:49,621

I mean, it's going to be split.

00:55:49,631 --> 00:55:51,291

That's the, that's the interesting thing.

00:55:51,631 --> 00:55:53,851

Right, but I don't think most

people are going to choose savanna.

00:55:55,271 --> 00:55:56,501

Yeah, that's, that's probably true.

00:55:57,011 --> 00:55:57,741

I'm not going to.

00:55:58,471 --> 00:56:00,161

I, I would choose the mountains.

00:56:00,451 --> 00:56:00,791

Same.

00:56:01,121 --> 00:56:01,411

Yeah.

00:56:01,581 --> 00:56:03,271

More of a mountain guy than a beach guy.

00:56:03,351 --> 00:56:04,681

My wife would choose the beach.

00:56:05,451 --> 00:56:07,674

and again, even the realms he talks about.

00:56:08,104 --> 00:56:11,014

We prefer wide open vistas

so that we can see predators.

00:56:11,424 --> 00:56:15,874

And yet, just a few pages later, we

prefer places that are unknown to us

00:56:15,874 --> 00:56:17,744

like rolling hills that we can explore.

00:56:18,394 --> 00:56:19,534

Yeah, but what about the predators?

00:56:19,534 --> 00:56:19,984

Exactly.

00:56:20,134 --> 00:56:20,844

That's what I was thinking.

00:56:20,844 --> 00:56:23,509

And Yeah, there's something

hiding behind that tree.

00:56:24,219 --> 00:56:25,169

Yeah, exactly.

00:56:25,179 --> 00:56:30,489

So, it's a nice experiment to play with

in your mind, but there's no way that you

00:56:30,489 --> 00:56:32,419

could offer any kind of definitive proof.

00:56:32,678 --> 00:56:37,066

But even if you could, even if you

could prove, or even if you had reasons

00:56:37,066 --> 00:56:39,106

to believe that, well, you have that.

00:56:39,324 --> 00:56:43,024

Is an understanding of beauty

that is entirely utilitarian.

00:56:43,444 --> 00:56:47,544

And utilitarian in the most narrow sense

of being able to pass on our genes.

00:56:48,306 --> 00:56:51,106

Yeah, which doesn't resonate

so much, so well with me.

00:56:51,596 --> 00:56:52,536

I don't think many people.

00:56:52,946 --> 00:56:56,866

I mean, to tell someone that they

value sunsets because our great

00:56:56,866 --> 00:57:01,091

ancestors, took notice of cosmological

events, and therefore they were

00:57:01,091 --> 00:57:03,231

more fit, or they value flowers.

00:57:03,741 --> 00:57:08,280

Not because of their inherent beauty,

but because maybe some ancestors, a

00:57:08,280 --> 00:57:12,615

few thousand generations ago, paid

attention to flowers, and therefore, they

00:57:12,615 --> 00:57:14,285

increased their evolutionary fitness.

00:57:14,775 --> 00:57:15,574

Or even broader.

00:57:16,065 --> 00:57:17,555

That you love your spouse.

00:57:18,705 --> 00:57:20,955

For evolutionary reasons only.

00:57:21,015 --> 00:57:22,285

That you love your child.

00:57:22,645 --> 00:57:25,815

Only because you're a meat puppet

being manipulated by your genes

00:57:25,995 --> 00:57:27,695

to pass on your genes more fully.

00:57:28,005 --> 00:57:31,444

I was just thinking that's not a very

romantic thing to say to your spouse.

00:57:31,754 --> 00:57:34,844

No, I wouldn't, I wouldn't go there

for Valentine's Day is coming up.

00:57:34,874 --> 00:57:35,924

Probably don't.

00:57:36,194 --> 00:57:37,264

Honey, why do you love me?

00:57:37,264 --> 00:57:44,784

Well Because But, the reason I want to

highlight this And again, I give full

00:57:44,784 --> 00:57:48,840

props to Steven Pinker for actually

putting it down on paper, even though

00:57:48,840 --> 00:57:50,738

I think he's fundamentally wrong.

00:57:51,218 --> 00:57:53,008

He does what most naturalists don't.

00:57:53,303 --> 00:57:56,603

But I think by doing so, he

highlights the beauty of the

00:57:56,603 --> 00:57:58,703

Christian understanding of beauty.

00:57:59,043 --> 00:58:02,316

Though we may not understand

how it works exactly.

00:58:02,573 --> 00:58:06,293

Even though I certainly cannot explain

it as well as it could be explained.

00:58:07,133 --> 00:58:13,283

I think we get the things we experience

around us that are beautiful, are

00:58:13,283 --> 00:58:18,610

beautiful objectively, they have beauty

in themselves, not just because in some

00:58:18,710 --> 00:58:23,190

way they increase my reproductive fitness,

but because they're beautiful things.

00:58:24,010 --> 00:58:26,590

They're beautiful things

because beauty is a real thing.

00:58:27,240 --> 00:58:31,870

that transcends my life and my

desires and my genes desires.

00:58:32,870 --> 00:58:37,680

It's an expression somehow, in some

way, of the wonder and the grandeur

00:58:37,680 --> 00:58:42,470

and the majesty of God who made

all things, including those things

00:58:42,480 --> 00:58:43,850

that we find especially beautiful.

00:58:45,200 --> 00:58:46,260

So that's the difference.

00:58:46,330 --> 00:58:50,551

And that's why, to me, even if I had

a thousand reasons for doubting God's

00:58:50,551 --> 00:58:55,186

existence, and even if Naturalism or

atheism was compelling on other grounds.

00:58:55,826 --> 00:58:56,936

I don't think I could get there.

00:58:57,546 --> 00:59:00,826

Because it doesn't ring true to

the deepest parts of who I am.

00:59:01,623 --> 00:59:06,685

Yeah, you see something beautiful and

you know in your soul that there is

00:59:06,685 --> 00:59:08,535

something innately beautiful about that.

00:59:08,965 --> 00:59:09,225

Yeah.

00:59:10,760 --> 00:59:11,790

Utilitarian.

00:59:11,940 --> 00:59:12,190

Yeah.

00:59:12,300 --> 00:59:16,810

And yes, and I'm not just disregarding

facts for desire, because like I

00:59:16,810 --> 00:59:20,010

said, I don't think you can establish

the naturalistic viewpoint at all.

00:59:20,530 --> 00:59:22,240

There's no proof or evidence.

00:59:22,560 --> 00:59:25,830

You can't run science experiments

to prove most of these assertions.

00:59:26,295 --> 00:59:28,735

I'm not rejecting facts for desire.

00:59:29,365 --> 00:59:34,374

I am looking at two different ways Of

understanding beauty within this world.

00:59:34,734 --> 00:59:36,614

Neither of which can really be proven.

00:59:36,894 --> 00:59:42,094

And I'd say one of those is

lovely, and meaningful, and moving.

00:59:43,364 --> 00:59:45,414

And the other is shallow

and reductionistic.

00:59:46,924 --> 00:59:49,619

And I'm gonna choose the

one that is beautiful.

00:59:49,889 --> 00:59:51,729

The one that gives beauty meaning.

00:59:52,801 --> 00:59:53,701

So that's where I am.

00:59:54,551 --> 00:59:54,801

Cool.

00:59:55,163 --> 00:59:55,673

That's good.

00:59:56,043 --> 00:59:56,703

That's really good.

00:59:57,225 --> 00:59:58,815

Well, any other thoughts or questions?

00:59:59,015 --> 01:00:01,715

My, my mind is drained now.

01:00:02,490 --> 01:00:03,170

I don't think so.

01:00:03,260 --> 01:00:05,530

I think this was really good

and helpful, so thank you.

01:00:06,190 --> 01:00:06,510

Yeah.

01:00:06,734 --> 01:00:10,004

I think sometime we'll come back to

the idea of the three transcendentals.

01:00:10,004 --> 01:00:11,024

we've talked about today.

01:00:11,314 --> 01:00:11,554

Yeah.

01:00:11,744 --> 01:00:14,474

Aristotelian philosophy

or Platonic philosophy.

01:00:15,264 --> 01:00:15,534

Right.

01:00:15,554 --> 01:00:16,764

Probably get some more into St.

01:00:16,764 --> 01:00:17,284

Thomas.

01:00:17,440 --> 01:00:21,535

Yeah, but for now I would just

say, enjoy the beauty of the world

01:00:21,535 --> 01:00:25,195

around you, whether it's in a

person's face, a person's action,

01:00:25,775 --> 01:00:29,345

whether it's in the music that you

hear, or the sunset you experience.

01:00:29,965 --> 01:00:30,615