Does it matter if Picasso was driven by destructive maschismo in his relationships, Oscar Wilde employed rent boys, Einstein was promiscuous (maybe) when heralding their different achievements? Scott FitzGerald produced one of the most beautifully written novels of the last century, does it matter if he was an alcoholic?
Are art and science subject at any point to personal moral justification?
Bear in mind that the morals usually employed are from the Abrahamic religions so on most occasions it concerns behaviour in relationships and worry most over sexual behaviour.
I'd say, "Yes it does matter" but it doesn't cancel out the value of their work. In asessing a novel or piece of art, knowing the creator's life (and weaknesses) does help understand where they are coming from, but the achievement is there even if they have many flaws. Let's face it, we all have character flaws.
I believe "it does matter"! In Arabic there is the saying: one who do not own something he will not be able to give it! No doubt, when you believe that "drinking" makes no damage your attitude towards forbidding drink in Islam will not be nuteral!
I love Jon's answer and I find Ahmad's answer particularly intriguing. One man's morality may be another man's immorality, and we should be careful passing judgment on "flaws" (or even worse). On the other hand, when we understand an artist to be flawed (or even worse), there's no reason why we can't admire the demonstrated skill without admiring the person who demonstrated it.
My first point to this is in the end can we compare?
Does morality (depending on how you understand it) compare or should be preferred to morality?
Indeed! Self evaluation is crucial and helps improve self reflection and reach self actualization.
Self concept (i.e., self confidence, self-esteem) is a vital part of self assessment. Having a good insight of yourself builds self developement.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Psychology
- Cognitive Science
- Mind