In a recent lecture on Radio 3, the composer James MacMillan drew our attention to the many recent or contemporary poets and composers who have taken a religious stance; among the names were T.S. Eliot, W.H. Auden, John Betjeman, John Tavener, György Ligeti, as well as, of course, himself. Can any conclusions be drawn from the apparent reluctance of such brilliantly creative people to embrace atheism?
Posted: November 24th 2008
Dave Hitt www
There are two ways to create a work of art. The first is to start with an idea and then work it and hone it and add to it and subtract from it until your creation is finished. The second is to be hit with a flash of inspiration, where the entire piece seems to emerge from nowhere, fully formed, and all you have to do is get it down on paper or canvas or a musical instrument.
Such inspiration feels like something magical, inexplicable, as if the idea was always there floating in the either and all you had to do was pluck it out. It’s easy to forget that it took years of work to develop the talent need to transform the inspiration into something real. Believers tend to ascribe anything they don’t understand to their god, so it’s not surprising that religious people experiencing this “magic” ascribe it to their deity.
Posted: December 7th 2008
bitbutter www
We don’t know that artists are less drawn to atheism than scientists are. This claim needs solid supporting evidence before the 'Why’ question can sensibly be posed.
Can any conclusions be drawn from the apparent reluctance of such brilliantly creative people to embrace atheism?
The radio program could easily have been made in reverse, listing brilliantly creative atheists. It’s not prudent to make broad generalisations based on small selections.
Posted: November 27th 2008
Reed Braden www
Creativity is not intelligence. One doesn’t have to know how the universe actually works to paint a picture.
I would guess that scientists are more atheistic than artists because scientists are better educated than most artists.
Posted: November 25th 2008
SmartLX www
Check here for a mountain of atheist counter-examples. The list is both historical and contemporary, and covers people in a variety of arts and other professions.
I would be more interested to know whether the actual proportion of atheists in creative fields is larger or smaller than in the general population. If the difference is statistically significant (which has a very specific mathematical meaning), it might actually tell us something about the general religious leanings (or otherwise) of artists. Mr Macmillan, I presume, was not forthcoming with any such information.
A simple list of religious celebrities tells us nothing, because there are ready-made lists of non-religious celebrities like the above to use in reply.
If it turns out that there is a significantly small proportion of atheists in creative professions, firstly it would not suggest that a god exists. It would be balanced out by the high proportion of atheists in the sciences (which is well-researched, and significant by a big margin).
Other than that, it would be difficult to deduce much more. One might suggest that the pre-eminence of religious art in certain media drew some people to study art in the first place. Perhaps the idea that the world is more mysterious and unknowable than a materialist view appeals more to artists, who make use of mystery and ambiguity, than it appeals to scientists, who work to dispel both. But this is all pseudo-psychological speculation.
Posted: November 24th 2008
logicel
Human creativity is an wonderfully prominent and important aspect of our natures. To arbitrarily assign creativity just to artists and not to scientists is odd. Scientists (who tend in general not to be overly religious, especially the elite ones) are creative in their ability to synthesize new theories from existing information. In addition, the creativity of scientists in allowing them to discover what they do increases the quality of life (often extending it via medical science) so we can all, including very gifted and talented artists, to be in the position to create and have the opportunity for long, fulfilling lives.
In the last one hundred years there have been many famous non-religious artists: H. G. Wells, Mark Twain, John Lennon, Gene Roddenberry, George Bernard Shaw, Arthur Rubenstein, Kurt Vonnegut, James Joyce, and H.L. Mencken for starters. And we can be sure to look forward to more in the coming decades.
Atheists can be creative and smart just like religious people can be. There really is no mystery regarding this reality. I am an atheist, a visual artist, and a fiction writer, while my beloved sister was an atheist, a physicist, a pianist, and a visual artist. Richard Feynman was a Nobel physicist, a visual artist, and a musician (not to mention a thrilling, in-demand university professor).
The only conclusion I can draw from the list of brilliantly creative people who are/were not atheists is: they were religious people who are/were brilliantly creative. Obviously. And what conclusion can be drawn from my list of brilliantly creative folks? They were/are atheists who were brilliantly creative. Obviously. Atheism, nor does religion, preclude creativity. Either does creativity ensure atheism or theism.
Artistic people are sometimes known to drink alcohol to excess and take drugs. The endorphins which are released may be connected to their creative bursts. Perhaps religious beliefs act in a drug-like manner, triggering the release of creativity-enhancing endorphins? (Was that mental musing a bit too creative?)
Posted: November 24th 2008