Poets, thieves and liars (Part II)

Part II of Griff’s serial essay on art and rationalism:
“In particular, White is outraged that Hitchens would say that “proteins and acids … constitute our nature.” White says no poet would concede this. I would say that no contemporary poet worth his or her salt would deny it. The route to true wonder is not the dead end of the soul, the spirit and gods, it is the open ended quest for knowledge in a material universe that may forever elude our complete understanding.”

tankawanka

In particular, White is outraged that Hitchens would say that “proteins and acids … constitute our nature.” White says no poet would concede this. I would say that no contemporary poet worth his or her salt would deny it.

Towards the end of Jeff Nichols deeply flawed film, Mud, the sometimes girlfriend of the main character says to the young protagonist of the film: “You don’t know Mud. He is a liar and people like him because he makes them feel good about themselves.” Therein is the answer to the question Why the appeal of the lie? that we posed in the first part of this fractured essay.

People listen to liars because liars, expert liars, make people feel good about themselves, and what better way to make people feel good about themselves than by telling them that they have an eternal soul and that a giant sky-pappy loves them.

View original post 500 more words

About John MacKenzie

I'll mumble for ya. Poetry, plus most things quantifiable: science, neuroscience, memory, epistemology, baseball. And so on.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Mumble back at me

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s