HUMAN ETHICS AND AESTETHICS: THE LANGUAGE OF MAN

"Human aesthetics correspond to human proportions, human ethics to the laws of social evolution"



Site IndexHuman goods: property and hapinessGo[l]d religions

The style of an artist, and the style of a society.


The present earth is changing from a historic ecosystem of human social organisms based in human beings, human goods, and human art into a single ecosystem ruled by metal organisms, networks, and financial systems, that we might call the metal-earth.

The main effect of that change is the increasing obsolescence of human art and human minds, submissive today to the industrial design of software for thinking machines.

However in the past, in the ecosystems-organisms of history that we have called nations and civilizations, words, legal systems and art were far more important, because they were the informative networks of societies. Verbal and visual knowledge and Art were the mind of civilizations as historic organisms, organized by legal information, and religion.

And so art, as the social networks of information of civilizations, was not so much an individual phenomena, but a collective phenomena. And the artist felt himself with a social role, as the neuronal cells, the informative organs of his society. It was for that reason the art of any artist was basically similar, to the art of all other artists of its society. It was “style-art”, because the style, was the collective message of a civilization. Today however, because civilizations are no longer ruled by human minds, but by networks of financial information, by company-mothers and its lobbies, by networks of metal-minds that produce information in industrial processes, the artist no longer has a social role of relevance. So he is free of any collective style. The style that controls ideas of artists, exists however in radios, televisions, internets, and all other forms of industrial information. A style which is controlled, and tailored to produce the basic message of industrial societies: men have as only purpose to work=reproduce machines, and test=consume them. Of course this message is presented with al the rhetoric of beauty, and freedom necessary to hide the fact, that work and consume are not acts that necessarily develop and increase the human sensorial freedom, but basically evolve and multiply machines. Yet the message has reached so much sophistication, that most human beings today, believe that to be a worker and a consumer is the paramount freedom of mankind; while to evolve human senses, and enjoy human goods, and the pleasures of human existence is either a “sin”, an act of “laziness”, and “weakness” and a “lost of time”. The fact is that all top predators in the Universe, exist to be lazy, lions of the savanna, enjoying the basic pleasures of his organism, to reproduce (sex-love), to feed energy [food, movement], and to receive its natural information (verbal thought and visual beauty in the human case). That is, the ideals of society before the industrial revolution - the ideals of renaissance, and the aristocracy, top predator caste of that age. And vice versa, and ideal world dedicated to the freedoms of machines, will imply that men-slaves of machines would dedicate their time to the reproduction of machines (work) its evolution (industrial research) and its vitalization as species in movement (consume of machines that vitalize their existence).

So it is evident that the freedom of the market, the freedom of the economy, is the freedom of machines and its company-mothers. While the biological freedom of the citizen, of the human being, were the ideals expressed by the art styles of historic civilizations. Those facts have of course enormous historic relevance, and explain why under such brain-washing propaganda, the classic historic, social, religious art and his aesthetic and ethic ideas, clash so deeply with modern ideologies of economical men and yet they were accepted and enjoyed by the citizens of Historic civilizations. They found in the social ideas of religious art, and the sensorial ideals of individual art, the pursuit of their self-realization as individual, biological human beings, and as part of a macro-social organism, a culture, or civilization, that social art harmonized, as nervous messages harmonize social cells in a body.

In all those cultures art was sacred, art was considered the informative network of the Historic organism. Art caused the evolution of the collective human mind. Art was the mind of civilizations, and acted in the social historic organism, as the nervous networks act in the human organism.



Art the informative mind of the civilizations. The canon of ethics and aestehtics


Since we have defined huamn art, as the visual and verbal perception olf space and time by the human ind, it fllows that collectiv e art was also visal and verbla rt, of colletive nature. And that collective nature imposed upon social art, two socila concepts: ethics and aesthetics of human nature. So classic art always had two basic forms, social ethic art, and individual aesthetic art, and two canons, moral, and beauty, carried by the word, and the eye of the human artist.

Today, even artists find those ideals, something of the past, because the artist today is not the valuator of reality, and has no ethic role. He does not educate the rest of the cells of society. So sacred art, religious art (which tried to create a social, harmonic morality among the different cells of society), even legal thought, has declined. Of course this has given individual freedom to artists, to reflect their individual personality since nobody cares really anymore for what we, the artists, neurons of humanity, have to say.

Yet for most of history, Art has been a social phenomena, since men, lived in a social organism. The artist lived within a society. His ideas were similar to those of other artists of that society, fruit of customs and learning processes within that society. And so, the information that the mental cells of a civilization developed (the artistic information of a culture) was similar in most of the artists of a civilization. Styles in art gathered those similar mind-wor[l]ds, coming from people living in the same place, at the same time, as neurons work in the same manner, in the same organisms.



Individual art, the genius... and its relationship with social art


The style of an artist, is the peculiar way in which the mind of the artist, transforms the biological “Wor[l]d” of perception, that all humans have in common; the sounds and image we perceive as the Universe. While most people see reality under those biological limits, the artist goes beyond the subjective eye-Wor[l]d of the human species, and adds certain personal subjective changes to those images and words. This is the artist's style.

The artist with his style goes beyond the “common way of perceiving reality”, and shows those other possible Worlds, that maybe some other species in some far away planet perceive directly (imagine a world where eyes see with the colors of a fauvist painter).

Still in the Earth, men see reality in a certain manner, and only artists are able to break with those conventions of the mind. Such individual artists are rightly called genius, since they create an entire new way of perception. When such new way of perception is meaningful, and harmonic, and can be understood at least partially by the audience, we have found an original artist.

Yet, in as much as men belong to social organisms, where they communicate in-form-ation to other human “cells” of the social organism, even individual genius, and its perception of reality, reproduces into works of art, that transmit the information to other “neurons” of the social organisms. In this manner, styles are transmitted, and create “schools” of art where many similar artist display the same style.

If the individual artist expresses its mind experience through its personal art, we can say that the society expresses its collective mind experience through schools of art.

If individual art is the evolution of the mental senses of the artist towards regions never explored by the common human mind, the style-art is the evolution of the collective mind of civilizations. It reflects the social mental state, of such civilization (as individual art reflects the mental state of the individual artist). In that sense, art becomes the collective mind of a civilization.

It is then clear that in classic history the role of artists was indeed sacred, fundamental, because verbal and visual artists, were in charge of recreating a Wor[l]d pleasant to man, where human social cells were in harmony, and shared as cells in any organism do, their vital information and energy. Ethic priests ruled the verbal minds of people with messages of love and ethics. Artists created beautiful environments, well constructed cities. Energy workers (farmers) fed the cells of the organisms. Literature educated the feelings of people, allowing bondage among individuals, at several levels (love, family, citizenship, religion). There was therefore a clear idea of what a social nation was, and what artists had to do in such society. That is why artists tried to find “canons” of beauty, that people would imitate, as role models.



The canons in classic art. What are ethics and aesthetics?


We can now understand the concept of a canon, both in verbal art (canon of ethics) and in visual art (canon of beauty). Today in individual art, when art is no longer the mind of civilizations, but science is, canons do not matter, but in the past, when art guided cultures, and took care of its survival and welfare, it was necessary and fundamental.

There was a canon of beauty in space, that had as element of reference the human form. Since we are humans, and we were top predators of the Earth, as all top predators do, we designed a Wor[l]d to our image and resemblance. So spatial arts, had as canon of beauty the proportions of human beings, and in its most beautiful creations (Greek, Italian art), that canon was respected, to create an environment in which man felt happy, in harmony with his surroundings, and dedicated to the pursuit of sensorial pleasure. This is the case of Greek and renaissance sculpture and architecture.

There was also a canon of beauty in time, defined by the biological language of measure of time, that mankind uses: verbal thought.

How can we define beauty on time? It is self-evident, that if you ask anyone, what he would want to happen in time, he would say, “I want to survive”. So survival is indeed, the canon of beauty in time. And survival has in social thought a name: Ethics. Ethic societies that promote peace, and abhor war, do not die away. Societies that create systematically weapons end in civil wars, or in national wars. Thus, the people that were considered great artists of verbal thought in the past, were the prophets and writers that praised peace, and with poetic parables, preached the well being and harmony among human beings. Philosophy and religion were considered the highest forms of verbal thought. This, as we said no longer holds, since we are no longer ruled by words, but by numbers, by men, but by machines and prices. But we cannot ignore the fact that ethics and religious thought have controlled mankind. And the great artists of the word have been those prophets such as Jesus and Buddha, that talked against weapons and money, and praised love, and human senses. The artist is indeed the prophet, not the church, or the latter commentator. The master of the Word is Jesus, that defends a prostitute, and foresees that those “who kill by the sword, will die by the sword”, not the Catholic Church or Luther, and Calvin that accept money and war, and repress sensorial love.



The quality of verbal art


As a consequence of the biological nature of languages, we cannot regard any longer verbal art, as a product, or a secondary commodity. “Literature for the sake of aesthetics; art for the sake of art” is far less relevant than “sacred art”, literature with an educational mission, either social literature and philosophy, or sensorial literature (fiction), which educates the senses and feelings of the people. There are qualities in the forms of literature, because literature has a function. Literature is not useless entertainment. Verbal Art is the biological language of mankind, and our societies. Its function is to mirror reality and explain the universe to man, from our own point of view, with the aim of helping human societies to survive. This means that we can qualify the quality of literature, according to such function.

It will be good literature, either legal, religious, fiction or logic literary art, a verbal construction that through its reading and practice, improves the capacity of an individual to behave ethically and in harmony with the other members of his society. It will be bad art, those literary and verbal forms that harm the harmony of societies.

So “War and Peace” is good art. So it is the “bill of rights” or the “Gospel”. They try to give the reader an “ethic sense of life” that favors peace over war; human rights over the rights of machines; and love and poverty, and despise for money and war, (the message of the gospel). Since history proves that those attitudes are positive for the survival of the individuals of society. On the other hand bad verbal art, is that art, which harms the energy and information of civilizations, pushing individuals against each other.

A typical script made in Hollywood that makes an apology of violence and murder is bad verbal art, regardless of its technological achievements. Its consequence is to multiply the use of weapons in our society, of technological species, that harm mankind.

The decalogue scripts of Polish director K. Kieslowski, are master pieces of filmed literature, despite its minimal technology because they make us reflect on the basic matters of love and life and death, far more important than the designed special effects of digital computers. A fascist law is also bad art. A religion which does not accept the equality of all men, a tribal religion of “chosen of god”, is also bad ethic verbal art. Since it allows war between tribes. Those facts are self-evident to any human being that thinks naturally about the purpose of art and verbal thought. They might collide with the “economic view”, that favors all forms of literature, specially those forms of literature, that multiply the use of machines, even weapons (economic and military nationalism, advertising, etc.)... according to the old lemma “you will defend me with your sword, and I will defend you with my word”.

Such art is considered here “rhetoric art”, bad literature, since its purpose is the opposite to the biological function of verbal thought. However in present societies most verbal art is rhetoric art, art that has neither a moral, ethic standing, or even any relationship with the reality of man as an individual or member of a human society. Why is that? Because words are no longer the language of information and power of our societies, a role that today belongs to money.

As a consequence, verbal thought is no longer the language of power, the sacred language, and it has no longer the role of guiding the survival of mankind. For that reason words enter in decadence, and loose “logic, realistic power”, becoming “fiction”, a language used to describe false realities. The value of things now is given by its price, not by its verbal meaning. And so mathematics describes reality, while words are used to describe fictions, and those realities of lesser power, such as the individual lives - no longer the social lives of people... Literature is now too often fiction, or science, or shallow I-literature, ego-trips and bio-pics of little relevance, or books on secondary senses and products (from gastronomy, to do-it-yourself manuals). Sacred literature has almost died away...



The function of visual art


What was the social role on that sacred view, of visual art? If we have considered verbal art, to be in charge of the temporal perception of a civilization, visual art, obviously will be in charge of the visual perception of such culture. Visual art therefore has also a human canon, an aesthetic, spatial canon, referred to the relative dimensions of man. If verbal art has to create temporal harmony among individuals, visual art has to create spatial harmony, beauty, in the space of that civilization.

Such is the classic vision of architecture and sculpture, urbanism and painting, even gardening, or agricultural development. All those arts that transform the space around us tried to create a harmonic environment in societies. And when both canons succeeded, we talk of a harmonic civilization in which ethics and aesthetics (the moral of the eye), favor a Wor[l]d built to the image and resemblance of mankind.

The function of art, is to shape the environment of man in a pleasant way. Yet since all measure in space and time is relative (Theory of Relativity), a pleasant space for man has the references of human size and form. To make of man the center of creation, the God of the Earth. This was understood perfectly by the theoretical minds of Renaissance, the last human culture, previous to the Industrial Revolution. The aim of renascence artists was to create ethics and aesthetics, for the Italian society. They worked hand in hand with the church in charge of the ethics of Christian societies. They tried to create “canons” of beauty as the gospel tried to create canons of ethics. They affirmed that men should try to achieve a mind and a body according to such canons. The artist, as the most complex mind of society, was the guide of the individual, which tried to achieve personal perfection as a human being, imitating those ethic and aesthetic roles, the artists showed him.

The destruction of the renaissance caused by the evolution of gunpowder weapons, the creation of religions that worshipped money instead of words as the language of information of human societies (Calvinism, Anglicanism), and the beginning of science with its despise for human words and human eyes, meant the collapse of the artist as the guide of human societies.

The human paradise as the goal of history also was lost. A new culture, and a new civilization appeared, where the goal of history became the progress of the machine, and the human goal, the paradise of human senses, where “man is the measure of all things” was forgotten.

We are living the consequences of such mistake, in a world in which man no longer matters, where humans and words are submissive to mathematics and machines...

Yet only the best human minds, verbal priests, and social activists that follow the original ideas of his wor[l]d-masters, sensorial artists, that do not renounce to explore fully the human nature, and rebels of thought that do not accept the brain-washing of scientific myths, and market-propaganda, realize of the errors of our society.



The myth of superman


All this bring us to a final reflection on the nature of the Human Masters, the great artists of verbal and visual wor[l]ds that have confronted throughout History, the Metal masters, warriors, traders and scientists that base their power, not in their own senses and biological nature, but in the power of energy-metal (lines of metal or weapons from swords to missiles, cycles of metal, or money, and metal-minds or scientific instruments).

Human Masters who “think more and see more”, are the true masters of mankind. Since mankind is a mental race -its body is not even the strongest of all carbolife species- and the master artist is the most developed human mental race, it is the artist, the “super-man”, not the warrior, or the scientist, that rely on weapons and metal-minds, to power up their bodies and minds. This was the vision of the Greek philosophers, and it is the biological truth. Hence, human masters, masters of the wor[l]d should rule human societies, as Plato wisely understood. They do not rule our societies, because warriors, traders and scientists, impose their power with the help of their metal. And even worse, some of our societies are ruled “at distance” by the me[n]tal intelligence of money, by the biological laws of economics, that make of each man a mere consumer=tester and worker=reproducer of machines, without freedom. But those are political themes, on the “myths of human freedom”, in present money-controlled democracies, that go beyond the scope of this page.



Site IndexHuman goods: property and hapinessGo[l]d religions