Virginia Beach Theology and Philosophy Meetup Group

What makes a person worth watching — really watching? Not just observing, but tracking, following, rooting for, grieving over? We have built entire industries, calendars, and emotional lives around people we will never meet—athletes who play games for a living, celebrities who exist mostly as images on a screen. We wear their names on our backs, schedule our Sundays around their performances, and feel something genuinely close to grief when they retire or fall from grace.

This will be an exploration into the psychology, sociology, and philosophy behind our relationship with fame and athletic heroism. Why do we need heroes? What do we get from belonging to a team’s story? And what does it reveal about us — our values, our loneliness, our hunger for meaning — that we invest so much of ourselves in people who don’t know we exist?

Art often intersects with philosophy by probing questions of beauty, meaning, and existence, while theology sees it as a window into divine creation and human response to the transcendent.

Join us for a deep dive into the soul of creativity at the Chrysler Museum of Art. We are stepping out of the coffee shop and into the galleries to explore how humanity has used art to bridge the gap between the physical and the metaphysical.

From ancient icons to modern abstractions, art has functioned as more than just decoration—it has been a vessel for theological expression, a tool for philosophical rebellion, and a mirror for the divine. We will walk through the collections and discuss:
• The Sacred and the Profane: How has the portrayal of the "holy" evolved from the Byzantine era to contemporary works?
• Aesthetics as Truth: Is "beauty" an objective transcendental (like Truth and Goodness), or is it merely a cultural construct?
• The Death of the Author: In a secular age, who determines the meaning of a piece—the creator, the viewer, or something higher?
• Iconography vs. Idolatry: Where is the line between a window to the divine and a distraction from it?

The Details
• Location: Chrysler Museum of Art (Meeting in the Zinnia Cafe first to share a meal and discuss, the self-tour the museum)!
• Format: We will spend the first hour or so in a guided group discussion before moving through specific galleries to analyze selected works through a philosophical lens.
• Note: No prior art history degree is required—only an inquisitive mind and a passion for deep conversation.

Philosophy-Focused Videos:
• How Do Artists Incorporate Philosophical Concepts Into Their Work? (YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cLwhvMDgwM): This short video traces art movements like Surrealism and Existentialism, showing how philosophy shapes artistic expression of the unconscious and human freedom.[youtube]
• What is Philosophy of Art? (YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cw5o-P5B68g): Explores if art expands reality or provides knowledge, with experts linking aesthetics to broader philosophical inquiry.[youtube]
• Philosophy of Art – Artist Intention (YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Q_DODP-x78): Examines debates on whether artist intent or viewer interpretation defines a work’s meaning.[youtube]
Theology-Focused Videos
• Visual Arts and Christian Theology (YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktchpOlYu5E): Dr. Chloë Reddaway connects images to the Incarnation, arguing art reveals material creation as a medium of divine revelation.[youtube]
• The Art of Theology (YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1rRAC8F234): Highlights partnerships between theology and art in worship, bridging abstract doctrine with visual expression.[youtube]
• Why Theology is Important for Artists (YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9G3Km24mMo): Posits God as the first artist, linking creative work to transcendentals like beauty.[youtube]

Let’s go back to October 27, 1982 when Prince released 1999. During this time period, nuclear war feels like a real possibility. The news is terrifying. And Prince’s response to all of it was to write a banger and tell everyone to dance.

Which raises a genuinely interesting question:
When the world feels like it’s falling apart what’s the right way to live?

This isn’t a lecture. There’s no homework (except listen to the song 1999 by Prince if you never heard it and review the lyrics) Nobody is going to use words you need to Google afterward. This is just a group of curious people sitting down to wrestle with something that actually matters.

Because here’s the thing October 27, 1982 might as well be today. Climate change, political chaos, AI taking jobs, endless bad news on your phone. The doom is different but the feeling is the same.
So what do you do with that feeling? Do you party through it like Prince? Do you unplug and ignore it? Do you fight it head on? Do you quietly fall apart?

We’ll talk about:
• Whether joy in dark times is brave or just a way of avoiding reality
• Why some people thrive under pressure while others shut down
• Whether living for today is wisdom or just a really good excuse
• What “a good life” even looks like when the future feels uncertain.

The one question we’ll keep coming back to:
Is dancing through the apocalypse the most human thing we can do or are we just lying to ourselves?

Let’s discuss one of the great modern philosophers of our time Prince!

Descartes' dualism argues that mind and body are fundamentally distinct substances. The mind is an immaterial, thinking thing, independent of the physical body. The will, therefore, is inherently free and unconstrained, operating as the source of human freedom.

On the other hand, many contemporary philosophers hold that there is no immaterial soul or will, and therefore no Cartesian free will. Additionally, many contemporary neuroscientists, such as Robert Sapolsky, argue that any capacity for free choice is limited by prior biological factors, including neural activation, genetics, and the environment. Some suggest a compatibilist view. Biology may indicate there is no objective free will, but Daniel Dennett claims free will is real "to us" in the same sense that colors are real "to us." There may not be colors objectively, but we function in a world of real colors. We stop at a red light, enjoy a blue sky, and follow a hiking trail marked by colors. In the same sense, we hold people responsible for their actions. Regardless of biological evidence against free will, you get a ticket for speeding and go to jail for murder. For us, free will is real and necessary.

Compatibilist free will defines freedom as the ability to act in accordance with one's desires, motives, and intentions without external coercion or impediment, even if those desires are determined by prior events.

Jerry Coyne has a problem with that definition of free will. Dennett is not a Cartesian dualist in that there is a will or mind separate from the brain that can make independent choices. Dennett and compatibilists have redefined traditional free will to make it compatible with determinism. Coyne argues that the compatibilist view of free will is not what the average person thinks of as free will. When compatibilists say free will exists, it misleads people into thinking they have traditional dualist free will.

Dennett defends his view of free will, and Coyne disagrees with his position:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wF-MJcw7QnA&list=PLrxfgDEc2NxZiPzRjCs0Ai6DwM49xshC-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiZAlG-BhwA&list=PLrxfgDEc2NxZiPzRjCs0Ai6DwM49xshC-&index=3