|Well, I do know something about Asian and African art, actually, but didn't want to make this a discussion about art and derail. You seemed to want a definition of beauty and harmony and I gave you a couple quick links. A discussion of world art styles would belong in a different forum, or on a different board entirely.
No, I don't want a definition of art. All I have been saying is that the question of whether or not there is a god is more similar to the question of whether art exists (and what it is) than the question of whether, say, rocks exist. I draw the parallel because art (or literature, or love for example) are things that people believe in, that people claim to have empirical evidence for, but which can't be captured by science and which contain a large measure of necessary
subjectivity. By necessary subjectivity, I mean that art, literature, and love require the presence of someone feeling or experiencing them in the sense that the lover (shall we call the art, literature or romantic lover simply "the lover"?) feels that they are what they are and this feeling is part of the identity of the thing as art, literature, or the beloved.
The natural counter to this, of course, is that art, literature, etc. wouldn't exist if humans did not exist, so to link god to this is also to say that if humans didn't exist, god would not exist. This would probably be consistant to what an atheist would say. To this I will counter that whether or not god would exist if humans didn't exist, god would not exist as humans know god if humans did not exist. This sounds like an odd or trivial thing to say, but I think that this thread has been conducting several conversations simultaneously. A god that exists whether humans exist or not is not something that can be proven or disproven by science. This is one discussion. The second is "is there any tangible evidence of any sort that god exists"? The answer is yes, in the sense that people who belive in god generally also experience the presence of god in tangible ways. This is not proof that god exists in a scientific sense, but it may
be proof that god exists in the sense that art or literature or love exists. The third conversation asks the question "when people say they are experiencing god, what are they actually experiencing"? Some of you will say, simply, "god" and some will say something else. The fourth conversation, one we have not quite started, is "what difference does it make if one believes in god or not"? This is the question that I thought that the origional poster was asking at the very beginning.
Let's get back to God now, can we?