>>4108850Kant is incomprehensible without the implicit belief in God. But implicit belief in God is technically a sin, knowing that there is a creator and therefore a purpose and things extrinsic to the human mind rather than a vast simulation of qualia, but not following the book. Morals are, without god, mere instincts at their most "objective", which can vary between individual animals. Not one moral "fact" is self evident as extrinsic to a human mind unless God has dictated it to be so. Thus without God kant comes off as rather self centered and arrogant and makes not one convincing argument if you come from a pagan or sociopathic moral base and your "a priori" knowledge is entirely different, to the point you consider empathy the disorder. Luckily for him he was in fact a Christian and his work is a rational justification and explanation of the moral groundwork set forth in the bible, intended for Christian readers who were raised with a Christian moral base, thus a priori knowledge is indeed a priori because God created all life with that knowledge and people can be led astray, but not born different.
Anyways, something about art:
Art always comes from God, even if it is made by a human
>Tell all the skilled workers to whom I have given wisdom in such matters that they are to make garments for Aaron, for his consecration, so he may serve me as priest. Exodus 28:3God is the prime artist and all things that are beautiful have a creator.
>He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also, he has put eternity into man's heart, yet so that he cannot find out what God has done from the beginning to the end. Ecclesiastes 3:11
And all art is God's beauty, and all acts of art by man are for God's glory. This is the definition art. A mere creative process is giving the title of art to the works of satan and the title of artist, rather than deviser of ruin, to satan himself.
A photographer's highest achievement is then glorifying God's creation.
