Quote:
Originally posted by Mantus
We attach emotion to objects and subjects that we are already aware off. [sic]
|
Exactly. For me, faith is about attaching an emotion, trust/love/loyalty, to a subject that i have come to know through specific, objective experiences. That's what i tried to convey, that it isn't a total abstract, but a response to what we can experience in our lives.
Quote:
|
Yet do they prove that emotion can validate the existence of something? No.
|
Let me try that again. Emotion is real, in and of itself. Sight is a sensation that describes a reality-the influx of EM radiation. Emotion is a sensation that describes a reality-the feedback of an entire system, both cognative and physical. I believe it is key to understanding questions of non-objective natures.
Art is not simply a product of sight/sound patterns. It is also our reaction to it. Can that be desribed entirely with in the confines of our sensory input? I doubt it.
When dealing with love, or morality, or God...i doubt one could describe any of these entirely with in the senses. Yet does anyone doubt the reality of art? Or love?
Now, i know there are people who will tell me i'm making a semantic error. But i'm quite convinced that they are mistaken. Concepts, abstracts, and othersuch things are realities. They are not physically real. But as far as our minds are concerned, they are. How else to explain the consistant reaction to and urge to interact with such things as art, freedom, or God?