Dante`s Inferno- what level are you in?

[katya]

I, suffering once again from insomnia, decided to look for a website where I could read Dante`s Divine Comedy online. I had started it in America and made it almost all the way through Inferno, so I had an idea what it was. Anyway, in my search, I came across this quiz: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv It`s a quiz about what level of Dante`s Hell you would end up in, supposing things were as he says. I thought hey, why not? Well, I answered all the questions honestly (and a lot of the questions were objective, clearly yes or no, thus making the results a little less relative), and halfway through the quiz I realized about in what direction I was headed... Turns out I ended up on the 8th level, out of 9 levels of Hell and one for Purgatory. Shock!

I was curious to see how my fellow mooters would fare. But really, it got me thinking about it. At first it seemed a little harsh, throwing me down there like that. The thinking seemed almost old fashioned. Well, some of the things I don`t really think are bad, like homosexuality and atheism, but some of you might disagree with me there and that`s fine. But there are a lot of sins that`ll put you down into a deeper level of Hell that I think really are something that maybe should be avoided, regardless of religious beliefs. For example gluttony, greed, malice. What do you think? Do you think Dante is behind the times or timeless? And does this thread already exist or maybe should be placed in the General Lit. thread? Because I don`t mean it to be about Dante or the Divine Inferno exactly, but just the ideas presented within (which is kind of the same?).

Read: The question I am asking is (1) what score did you get and (2) do you think the world (or your life) would be better if people (or just yourself) avoided such sins as gluttony, greed, lust, malice, etc.? Or do you think we should enjoy the world, food, possessions, sex, violence, etc.? Regardless of any religious beliefs (i.e. "Because God said so"). Do you think it`s worth trying to live a pure and virtuous life?

[The Gaffer]

I'm in Limbo:

These are the virtuous pagans, the great philosophers and authors, unbaptised children, and others unfit to enter the kingdom of heaven. You share company with Caesar, Homer, Virgil, Socrates, and Aristotle.

The quiz seemed to be asking the same thing in lots of different ways. I guess that's how these things work.

Originally Posted by katya

do you think the world (or your life) would be better if people (or just yourself) avoided such sins as gluttony, greed, lust, malice, etc.? ?

Hondootedly

Originally Posted by katya

Or do you think we should enjoy the world, food, possessions, sex, violence, etc.?

Well, of course, you can enjoy the world without having to be gluttonous or violent about it.

Originally Posted by katya

Regardless of any religious beliefs (i.e. "Because God said so"). Do you think it`s worth trying to live a pure and virtuous life?

Yes, on many levels. In utilitarian terms, both for self-interest and collective interest; in moral terms, it is the right thing to do.

But the question is kind of an oxymoron without some sort of religious belief: I believe that we are all moral beings, and the vast majority of us live our lives in a way that we think of as being decent. By definition, since what we think of as decent could be defined as what we think is acceptable behaviour.

Whether that matches up to some sort of God-bothersome yardstick, or even a Leftie, Knit-your-own-free-range-sandals yardstick, is a different question.

[Spock]

D.I. is literature; abracadabra, it's there.

[Lief Erikson]

I'll keep you company, Katya, among the others who are tearing their own skin off . I'm in the 8th level of hell too .

Though some of the things I marked down aren't really sins, I think. For example, "do you "hate" everyone?" I answered yes to, because Jesus said, "whoever does not hate his mother, brother and sisters for my sake is not worthy of me." Jesus, of course, was merely saying that nothing must come higher in a person's life than God. I don't know if I succeed in that completely yet, but their question was open to my devious, twisting interpretations!

It was a very fun quiz.

[inked]

For the attentive reader, one will see in Dante's Inferno the application of the moral code by which they professed to live. Stoics and Cynics and Aristotleans etc are present, as well as followers of Nietsche before their current designations. Those without a professed code of ethics or morals are judged by natural law.

Contrary to the popular assumption that Dante just put his enemies there, you'll find many friends and acquaintances and persons of stature.

I, not surprisingly, think moral behaviours very important.

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by inked

Contrary to the popular assumption that Dante just put his enemies there, you'll find many friends

What friends of his did he put in there?

[inked]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

What friends of his did he put in there?

Here's a cool site to double check references. Put it in your favourites:

http://danteworlds.laits.utexas.edu/index2.html

As to friends:

Virgil (Limbo by his own admission)

Ciacco (Circle 3, Canto 6) gluttony; nickname ="pig"

Guido Cavalcanti's father, Cavalcanti de Cavalcanti (Circle 6, Canto 10) who speaks of Dante's best friend, Guido Cavalcanti, and his impending death and displacement to ?hell?

Brunetto Latini (Circle 7, Canto 15) Dante's mentor and friend

As to the admired by Dante:

Limbo and the Classical Greats there besides Virgil

the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick (Circle 6, Canto 10)

etc.

That should get you going.

[-elfearz-]

Cute thread

I expected to end up somewhere around level 9...but in fact I'm a Virtuous Non-Believer (Level 1), and get to spend eternity in "a place of sorrow without torment...upon the brink of grief's abysmal valley."

I'm also highly lustful, moderately heretical and moderately fraudulent

Originally Posted by katya

do you think the world (or your life) would be better if people (or just yourself) avoided such sins as gluttony, greed, lust, malice, etc.? Or do you think we should enjoy the world, food, possessions, sex, violence, etc.? Regardless of any religious beliefs (i.e. "Because God said so").

Both . I don't think there's anything wrong with enjoying the world, but think that any kind of self-gratifying behaviour, when carried to extremes, can be very unhealthy both for individuals and society. I think certain amounts of gluttony, greed, lust and malice occur naturally in most people (maybe even all people), but that any of these traits is unhealthy in excess.

Of course, what "excess" is is relative Like Gaffer said, we live our lives according to personal sets of morals (whether these morals are determined/influenced by religion or not); therefore different people will consider different kinds of behaviour to be acceptable/unacceptable.

Originally Posted by katya

Do you think it`s worth trying to live a pure and virtuous life?

I agree with Gaffer - I think that most people do naturally try to live moral lives, and that most of us try to live "pure" lives in the sense that we try to avoid things that we consider "evil". But of course, we don't all think the same things are "evil".

[Pytt]

I got into 6. level of hell, where the heretics goes.

[Farimir Captain of Gondor]

Originally Posted by Pytt

I got into 6. level of hell, where the heretics goes.

I too am burning in the "Extreme" 6th level. Ahh to be a heretic.

[sun-star]

I got Purgatory. If I start to feel smug about it, do I plummet down a couple of levels?

Originally Posted by katya

I was curious to see how my fellow mooters would fare. But really, it got me thinking about it. At first it seemed a little harsh, throwing me down there like that. The thinking seemed almost old fashioned. Well, some of the things I don`t really think are bad, like homosexuality and atheism, but some of you might disagree with me there and that`s fine. But there are a lot of sins that`ll put you down into a deeper level of Hell that I think really are something that maybe should be avoided, regardless of religious beliefs. For example gluttony, greed, malice. What do you think? Do you think Dante is behind the times or timeless?

Most of the sins Dante includes are timeless, and are still around today even if they've taken on new forms. However, the scale that he puts them on is not necessarily shared by many people now, and probably indicates the preoccupations of his time - the particular emphasis given to treachery, for example, can certainly be seen as reflecting political concerns as well as moral ones. Dante also doesn't seem to have a place for Pride, which is one of the deadly sins... I don't know if suicide is still technically considered a sin by the Church, but in my experience people who try to commit suicide or are depressed aren't treated as sinners any more. Anyway, I'd say Dante is of his time rather than behind the times.

Read: The question I am asking is (1) what score did you get and (2) do you think the world (or your life) would be better if people (or just yourself) avoided such sins as gluttony, greed, lust, malice, etc.? Or do you think we should enjoy the world, food, possessions, sex, violence, etc.?

I agree with those who've said that moderation is the key (except with malice and violence, perhaps ). Food, possessions and sex were all created by God and were surely meant to be enjoyed, as long as they aren't valued above anything else.

[inked]

Sun-star,

Pride is THE capital sin, the font from which all the others flow. Betrayal is the ultimate state of pride: "My way or the highway" - which Brutus. Cassius, and Judas all succumb. This is pictured and written in the Inferno.

"Lucifer, Satan, Dis, Beelzebub--Dante throws every name in the book at the Devil, once the most beautiful angel (Lucifer means "light-bearer") then--following his rebellion against God--the source of evil and sorrow in the world, beginning with his corruption of Eve and Adam in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3). Dante's Lucifer is a parodic composite of his wickedness and the divine powers that punish him in hell. As ugly as he once was beautiful, Lucifer is the wretched emperor of hell, whose tremendous size (he dwarfs even the Giants) stands in contrast with his limited powers: his flapping wings generate the wind that keeps the lake frozen and his three mouths chew on the shade-bodies of three arch-traitors, the gore mixing with tears gushing from Lucifer's three sets of eyes (Inf. 34.53-7). Lucifer's three faces--each a different color (red, whitish-yellow, black)--parody the doctrine of the Trinity: three complete persons (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) in one divine nature--the Divine Power, Highest Wisdom, and Primal Love that created the Gate of Hell and, by extension, the entire realm of eternal damnation. With the top half of his body towering over the ice, Lucifer resembles the Giants and other half-visible figures; after Dante and Virgil have passed through the center of the earth, their perspective changes and Lucifer appears upside-down, with his legs sticking up in the air. Consider the implications of visual parallels between Lucifer and other inhabitants of hell.

Eternally eaten by Lucifer's three mouths are--from left to right-- Brutus, Judas, and Cassius (Inf. 34.61-7). Brutus and Cassius, stuffed feet first in the jaws of Lucifer's black and whitish-yellow faces respectively, are punished in this lowest region for their assassination of Julius Caesar (44 B.C.E.), the founder of the Roman Empire that Dante viewed as an essential part of God's plan for human happiness. Both Brutus and Cassius fought on the side of Pompey in the civil war. However, following Pompey's defeat at Pharsalia in 48 B.C.E., Caesar pardoned them and invested them with high civic offices. Still, Cassius continued to harbor resentment against Caesar's dictatorship and enlisted the aid of Brutus in a conspiracy to kill Caesar and re-establish the republic. They succeeded in assassinating Caesar but their political-military ambitions were soon thwarted by Octavian (later Augustus) and Antony at Philippi (42 B.C.E.): Cassius, defeated by Antony and thinking (wrongly) that Brutus had been defeated by Octavian, had himself killed by a servant; Brutus indeed lost a subsequent battle and took his life as well. For Dante, Brutus and Cassius' betrayal of Julius Caesar, their benefactor and the world's supreme secular ruler, complements Judas Iscariot's betrayal of Jesus, the Christian man-god, in the Bible. Judas, one of the twelve apostles, strikes a deal to betray Jesus for thirty pieces of silver; he fulfills his treacherous role--foreseen by Jesus at the Last Supper--when he later identifies Jesus to the authorities with a kiss; regretting this betrayal that will lead to Jesus' death, Judas returns the silver and hangs himself (Matthew 26:14-16; 26:21-5; 26:47-9; 27:3-5). Suffering even more than Brutus and Cassius, Dante's Judas is placed head-first inside Lucifer's central mouth, with his back skinned by the devil's claws (Inf. 34.58-63). " (Danteworlds, op cit)

[Falagar]

Being a great admirer of Dante (though I haven't even finished Inferno yet) I'm happy to say I managed Limbo. Though, by only altering two-three questions (not such a big leap, I'd consider them minor), I ended up in the 6th.

In other words, still some things to take care of before I get to see the man himself down there in the 9th.

[katya]

Nice replies so far everyone. ^_^ I figured you`d probably say it was about a balance. But the thing is, I have been going through life doing just that- trying to avoid excess while still enjoying life. But I wonder, maybe it just might be better to try even harder- I think I am tempted to say "it`s ok in moderation" just because I want to do something. I wonder if it would be better if people did think about it more like "this is bad, period". Does anyone think there could be something gained from it? Or avoided, for that matter? I`ve seen people unhappy because of their excess- maybe they thought they had a balance too. What do you think?

That`s interesting, Falagar- which level is limbo again?

[The Gaffer]

IIRC, Limbo is for "virtuous unbelievers". Which is a bit annoying, having spent one's life being virtuous because you chose to rather than because you were afraid of going to Hell.

Sun-star makes some very sensible comments, as ever. A good example might be sex: I don't see any problem with being "virtuous" and going at it like rabbits. Clearly, an older conception of "virtue" is involved here.

Katya, I assume you are referring to the less black-and-white areas, such as getting rat-arsed on booze and drugs and waking up in a pool of your own puke.

In which case, excess is good in moderation.

[Mari]

The third hell...

[The last sane person]

The Dante's Inferno Test has sent you to Purgatory!

How did I manage purgatory?

[Nautipus]

Hey! Your here, too? Coolio...

[The last sane person]

Yes, not sure how I managed it. Guess I must have toned down in the past few years.

[Midge]

I got into Purgatory...

As to the living thing... I like trying to live a virtuous life. It gives me an excuse to be good.