FLASHP01NT

Regarding Episode #2: Women: "Nudity vs Nakedness": John's assessment, including those of the women he interviewed, are wrong. To start: Beauty is objective, good and evil are objective, and the quality of art is objective. If we set aside the physical value of art, in relation to the motives of the artist, the spiritual value of a work becomes apparent.

If someone views something physical without having the knowledge of universal objectivity, they will not be able to understand the meaning of what they're viewing beyond a recognition of "person, place, or thing".

Art is an intentional physical creation of man. This means every work of art has only one true meaning, and therefore, only one true method of understanding. This doesn't preclude the value of inaccurate interpretations and false assumptions. A viewer's "in a vacuum" artistic interpretation represents half of the information necessary to reach the whole truth of an artwork. Wholistic understanding of an art piece remains buried until its intended meaning becomes known to the viewer. In a room populated by only a work of art and its viewer, the true meaning of the artwork can only be revealed through contemplative effort. This conscious effort involves formulating a theoretical lattice of everything the viewer knows to be objectively true (about themselves, others and the universe). A worldview as close to objective truth as possible is ideal; It allows the viewer to see themselves more honestly and, in doing so, more accurately compare their mind to that of the artists. With this updated theory of mind one may better deduce the relevant "who, what, when, where and why" of an art piece. The viewer compares likely perspectives and focuses on the most poignant "knowns", as well as the most plausible "unknown unknowns". Results from this comparison are accepted as a sufficient explanation for the merits of an artistic expression.

Good art, alone, requires multiple levels of abstractive analysis to reveal any spiritually conclusive truth. This incentivizes the viewer to think in ways untypical to normal day-to-day life (and even untypical to traditional forms of psychoanalysis). As the viewer learns more about reality, through the contemplation of the possible thoughts and experiences of others, their ability to accurately gauge the intent and meaning of an art piece increases. The accuracy of this deduction, in comparison to the initial (personal) assessment, represents the total spiritual value of the art piece (as a philosophical lesson). In other words: A viewer of art learns to perceive reality more accurately, by learning what a piece of art intends to mean, not by what they think it could mean. Only by knowing what art intends to mean can they perceive the distance that existed between their initial interpretation and the truth.

Therefore good art challenges its viewers to understand reality better by providing them with the opportunity to deploy their minds on a static abstraction with a complexity high enough to be of existential value. Now, when the concept of physical beauty is reintroduced, it can be seen as, both, art, and a positive motivator for spiritual growth: the more physically beautiful the art is, the more likely it is to contain a quality truth, and the more likely its viewers are to take pleasure in deciphering it.