Skip to main content
Log in

Of Art and Blasphemy

  • Published:
Ethical Theory and Moral Practice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

What does philosophy have to say about the argument that blasphemous art ought not to be publicly displayed? We examine four concepts of blasphemy: blasphemy as offence, attack on religion, attack on the sacred, attack on the blasphemer himself. We argue all four are needed to grasp this complex concept. We also argue for blasphemy as primarily a moral, not a religious concept. We then criticise four arguments for the public display of blasphemous art: it may be beautiful, provocative, devoutly intended, and is autonomous of religious concerns. Finally, we discuss the notions of blasphemy and blasphemous art as public offences. We conclude that the display of blasphemous art is a public, and not merely a private moral offence, and that there are respectable philosophical arguments for this conclusion.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • ABC Radio National, Serrano Forum, Arts Today, 14 October 1997.

  • Aquinas, St. Thomas, Summa Theologiæ. Various editions.

  • Augustine (of Hippo), St., De baptismo contra Donastistas. Various editions.

  • Augustine (of Hippo), St., Sermons. Various editions.

  • Boyle, J., Grisez, G. & Finnis, J., Incoherence and consequentialism (or proportionalism)-a rejoinder, American Catholic Philosphical Quarterly 64 (1990).

  • Boyle, J., Grisez, G. & Tollefsen, O., Free Choice: A Self-Referential Argument. Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cobb, J.B. & Griffin, D.R., Process Theology: An Introductory Exposition. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chrysostom, St. John, Concerning the Statues. Various editions.

  • Creel, R.E., Divine Impassibility: An Essay in Philosophical Theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dodds, M.J., The Unchanging God of Love. Fribourg: Editions Universitaires Fribourg Suisse, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, M., Natural Symbols. Middlesex: Penguin, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dworkin, R., Life's Dominion: An Argument about Abortion, Euthanasia, and Individual Freedom. New York: Knopf, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eliade, M., Images and Symbol. London: Sheed and Ward, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinberg, J., Offence To Others. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnis, J., Fundamentals of Ethics. Oxford University Press, 1983.

  • Finnis, J., Natural Law and Natural Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foot, P., Morality As A System of Hypothetical Imperatives, Philosophical Review, 81 (1972).

  • Gadamer, H-G., The Relevance of the Beautiful and Other Essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaita, R., Good and Evil: An Absolute Conception. Macmillan, 1991.

  • George, R.P., Does the ‘incommensurability thesis’ imperil common sense moral judgments? American Journal Jurisdiction 37 (1992).

  • George, R., Making Men Moral. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregory of Nyssa, St., Contra Apollinaris. Various editions.

  • Grisez, G., Against Consequentialism, American Journal Jurisdiction 23 (1978).

  • Grisez, G., Boyle, J. & Finnis, J.M., Practical principles, moral truth, and ultimate ends, American Journal Jurisdiction 32 (1987).

  • Kant, trans., Lewis W. Beck, Critique of Practical Reason. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1956.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kass, L., The Wisdom of Repugnance, The New Republic 216(22), (2 June 1997).

  • Laeuchli, S., Religion and Art in Conflict. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landesman, C., On violent reactions to art, The Spectator (4th October, 1997).

  • Lawton, D., Blasphemy. Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy, L., Treason Against God. New York: Schocken, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy, L., Blasphemy. New York: Knopf, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy, L., Blasphemy: Verbal Offence Against the Sacred from Moses to Salman Rushdie. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mannison, D., McRobbie, M. & Routley, R., Environmental Philosophy. Canberra: Australian National University Monograph, 1980.

  • McCabe, H., God Matters. London: Chapman, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, W., The Passion of God: Divine Suffering in Contemporary Protestant Theology. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mill, J.S., in M. Warnock (ed.), Utilitarianism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mozley, J.K., The Impassibility of God: A Survey of Christian Thought. London: Cambridge University Press, 1926.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M., Love's Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  • New South Wales Law Reform Commission, Report 74, Blasphemy. Sydney: National Library of Australia, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  • Otto, R., The Idea of the Holy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsay, H., Beyond Virtue. London: Macmillan, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J., Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ritoli, B., Letter to the Herald Sun (Melbourne), 10 October 1997, p. 20.

  • Rollins, A., Crucifix artwork prompts complaint, The Age (Melbourne), 7 October 1997, p. A3.

  • Scanlon, T., A Theory of Free Expression, Philosophical Public Affairs 1(2) (Winter 1972).

  • Scheffler, S., The Rejection of Consequentialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smart, J.C. & Williams, B., Utilitarianism: For and Against. London: Cambridge University Press, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherman, N., Making a Necessity of Virtue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, F., Blasphemy and the Battle for Faith. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M., The Moral Problem. Oxford: Blackwell, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sprigge, T., The Satanic Novel: a philosophical dialogue on blasphemy and censorship, Inquiry 33 (1990).

  • Stout, J., Ethics After Babel. Boston: Beacon Press, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, R., Immanuel Kant's Moral Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stith, R., On Death and Dworkin: A Critique of His Theory of Inviolability, Maryland Law Review 56 (1997).

  • Taylor, P., Respect for Nature: A Theory of Environmental Ethics. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, V., The Ritual Process. Chicago: Aldine, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webster, R., A Brief History of Blasphemy. Southwold: Orwell Press, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinandy, T.G., Does God Change? The Word's Becoming in the Incarnation. Still River, Mass.: St Bede's Publications, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fisher, A., Ramsay, H. Of Art and Blasphemy. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 3, 137–167 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009908431779

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009908431779

Navigation