Dante

[Charles Darwin]

Having read Dante's Inferno I was curious if anyone out there might feel that he was at all close as to the stucture of hell and the idea that "so you sinned, so shall you be punished" (metaphorically punished in a much harsher manner of course)

 

[Dyrwen]

After reading his take on things, even as a Satanist at the time, I felt it quite feasable. Albeit supernatural, it was still well explained and it's moral system fairly close as far as I can tell to that which is Christian in morals.

Although I somehow doubt the 9th level would hold traitors, so much as it would probably hold, oh... Heretics and Murderers.

Just my thoughts..heh.

 

[Philosoft]

I have a hard time reconciling Dante's meticulous descriptions of physical tortures with the Christian notion of a spiritual-only afterlife.

If there's one thing we know about physical pain, it's that it is pretty well dependent on the presence of specialized nerve endings. I don't think that fits so well in the Christian hell-model.

 

[Dyrwen]

Well Philo, that's what it's "Supernatural" and "Unknown" ...um, stuff.

heh, the rational of the pain and torment is there, but the possibility of it's existence is not.

 

[theeyesoftammyfaye]

as a former catholic attending a catholic university, i'd have to say that i find dante's picture of hell to be a bit skewed. the idea of having 'levels' of hell based on the 'levels' of the sins committed to be a bit far fetched. as i was taught, a sin is a sin is a sin. there aren't degrees of sinfulness.

ps i threw in the former catholic background so people wouldn't think i was simply a nonchristian spouting off stuff i didn't know.

 

[Philosoft]

Well Philo, that's what it's "Supernatural" and "Unknown" ...um, stuff.

heh, the rational of the pain and torment is there, but the possibility of it's existence is not.

Well, as far as we know, pain is a heavily physical-dependent phenomenon. It is, therefore, downright absurd to talk about spiritual pain as phenomenologically identical to physical pain. There's a vanishingly small probability Dante may be right, but it's still silly to try to draw obvious parallels between natural and supernatural.

 

[Dyrwen]

Obviously..

heh. Was just trying to play the devil's advocate so to speak, as another atheist poster.

 

[Diane_Windsor]

Dante was way off IMO.

DIANE

 

[gwenmead]

I've also read Dante's Inferno. To my understanding it's more a social and religious commentary than anything else. It's also semiautobiographical, not in the sense that Dante actually visited hell, but it's an exploration of his own spiritual crisis at the age of 35, translated into poetic metaphor. A lot of it comes from Dante's position on the religious conflicts of the time, too; the Guelph and Guibelline factions were fighting in Italy at the time, and Dante sided with the papist Guelphs. Dante managed to vilify various religious and political figures within the Inferno as well.

So despite the temptation to look at the Dantean structure of hell as a possibility, I simply can't get my head around the context in which the work was written: the events impacting Dante at the time, and his response to those events. The work is too much a reflection of the author, and the time and place in which he lived.

That's my $.02, adjusted for inflation.

 

[Spinrad]

Has anyone read Niven and Pournelle's followup novel of the same name? One of my favorite books. A science fiction writer and skeptic dies and is sent to hell, where he spends nearly his whole adventure trying to figure out who REALLY built the place, how it REALLY worked and so forth. Excellent read and highly recommended, even for true believers, as in the end the novel makes a very heartfelt and touching point about sin and redemption. Even though the writers were hardcore skeptics.

 

[MoonlessNight]

as a former catholic attending a catholic university, i'd have to say that i find dante's picture of hell to be a bit skewed. the idea of having 'levels' of hell based on the 'levels' of the sins committed to be a bit far fetched. as i was taught, a sin is a sin is a sin. there aren't degrees of sinfulness.

ps i threw in the former catholic background so people wouldn't think i was simply a nonchristian spouting off stuff i didn't know.

I find it a bid odd that with a Catholic background you never were taught about the difference between mortal and venial sins, or phrases such as "pride is the greatest of all sins." Not that I am trying to suggest that you are lying, just noting that Catholicism certainly does think that there are degrees of sinfulness.

 

[MoonlessNight]

I think that it is not likely in a literal sense, but metaphorically it is very close to the truth, even if you don't believe in hell. Many of the punishments reveal things about the associated vices.

 

[Moros]

Dante wrote novels.

 

[sparklecat]

Well... isn't this an old thread. Haven't seen Philo for awhile.