If atheism is better than religion, why is religious culture superior to atheistic culture?

Question

Religious cultures fostered the work of great artists like Bach and Michelangelo, and the architecture of Florence and Venice. Atheistic cultures, even at the height of their power, have fostered only dross and ugliness. Even in the case of "great" artists like Picasso and Francis Bacon, art produced by atheists is an art of distortion and/or ugliness. Is this because there is no spiritual inspiration behind their work?

Answer 1

Reality is ugly so it is logically reflected in atheistic art.

Answer 2

I too would like to know about these "atheistic cultures". Where and when were they do you suppose, they'd make a fascinating field of study.

Could any of the "spiritual inspiration" behind all this "religious culture" possibly have anything to do with the obscene amount of money which was available for the various churches to commission such works?

Answer 3

The 1563 Council of Trent (The Catholic Church's committee meetings to discuss and organize the Counter-Reformation; first convened in 1545) prohibited the use of nude images in religious art. Daniele da Volterra, (Michelangelo's follower) had to paint drapery over much of the nudity in the Last Judgment.

And you talk of religious cultures fostering the work of great artists - when in fact, the truth is - they forced great artists like Michelangelo, to cover up much of the nudity in his paintings.

Answer 4

Well that's a matter of taste. I think the ancient religious themed art is uglier than modern abstract art. Those old artists were commissioned to do those pieces anyway. I wouldn't be surprised if they were actually atheists. Atheists tend to be more creative and open-minded.. free thinkers.

Answer 5

"Atheistic cultures"? Like what?

Your premise is nonsense.

What atheism has going for it is that it respects the truth. Atheists also respect nature: much of that religious art amounts to failed attempts to outdo nature itself, in typical arrogant believers' frantic need to support an unsupportable claim that their "gods" are better than what really is.

Picasso created quite a bit of remarkably beautiful art, and was a genius by any definition. If you ever get the chance to visit the Picasso Museum in Antibes and see "Joie de Vivre", you'll realize that "distortion and/or ugliness" comment is WAY off-base.

Answer 6

There is no such thing as religious and atheistic cultures. The only difference is that one side believes in god and the other doesn't.

It's like asking why is the culture of baseball supporters superior to that of basketball supporters.

Answer 7

silly superiority complex... the towers will topple if top heavy.

Ugliness is measured by one's perception... beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Bach was a mathematician over religious... his music reflects that. He worked FOR churches. Same with Mikey.
Though I agree with the last sentence... inspiration comes from the mysterious envelope. I also agree with Nobullant below... inspired by the 'real'. Inspired...

Answer 8

Mozart was an atheist. Is his music not beautiful? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I'm surprised you don't consider the figure of a man nailed to a cross a work of savagery.

Answer 9

It's probably because art is on the right side of the brain and calculation (science) is on the left side of the brain. Atheists tend to tilt more into science than art. Creationists tend to tilt more toward art, especially young earth Creationists who do not acknowledge the age of the earth and the age of the universe.

Answer 10

faith began out as a manner to describe what we did no longer understand, and likewise a manner responsible a miles better potential for our issues. yet we've technological know-how to completely and rationally clarify nature, so faith has exchange into out of date, different than to grant ethical criteria and a social outlet. Btw, each non secular and non-non secular team claims to be "the excellent", no longer in basic terms Atheists. "faith is an phantasm and it derives its potential from the undeniable fact that it falls in with our instinctual needs." --Sigmund Freud, New Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis,1933.

Answer 11

You really are bored, aren't you?

Atheists don't need self gratification with proof of their existance like religious culture. Plus, if religion wasn't fiction, you wouldn't need all these markers to validate it. If a fat lady falls in the woods will anybody hear her? No. If there is no God, do I need to generate false facts to make people believe? Yes. Thus, you generate a fake culture to dupe people into following.