oh my. you can't just tell atheists about the atheism egregore. not without a mop handy, anyway.
-
-
Replying to @danlistensto @eigenrobot
Still, the way Peterson uses language here is nonsensical. Atheist are still humans, and therfore "religious creatures" in the broad sense, but to say that you can't be an atheist because of that is stupid provocative semantics.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @sjm_majewski @eigenrobot
I'm willing to forgive his stretching of conventional semantics here. Atheism in the 21st century is definitely a kind of theism. It's a reaction against theistic institutions and beliefs. It's not an alternative to theism. It should really be labeled anti-theism.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @danlistensto @eigenrobot
I think I know what you're getting at. Still I prefer terms like "ideology" to terms like "religion" or "theism" to describe the kind of political atheism that comes with a worldview ontology and morality. IMHO The distinction between supernatural and secular is worth preserving.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @sjm_majewski @danlistensto
Maybe disagreement over whether political is actually sacral to participants? Consider eg Roman entanglement of the two Consider our rituals (State of the Union, elections, Supreme Court priesthood, etc)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @eigenrobot @danlistensto
Yeah, In all of our "rituals" there is still no supernatural involved. I don't think it's an unclear distinction.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @sjm_majewski @danlistensto
supernatural as divine ordinance vs supernatural as "things I don't actually believe are happening" ? "I believe in the system" "I believe in the rule of law" "I believe in markets" magic is just another system?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @eigenrobot @danlistensto
Well, for starters we can put under the label of supernatural non-material (or material but nonexisting) agents. I just generally worry about equivocating too much when it comes to this sort of bird-eye view metaphors.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
For example - one can argue that "science is a social construct" and so is almost everything else. For specific defs of soc construct it's hard to disagree, but it's also hard to not want mention that science differs in important ways.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @sjm_majewski @eigenrobot
the scientific method (what scientists practice) is a social system (not construct, system) but science has as its domain of inquiry the material world so scientific findings are about matter and we don't have this sort of confusion in that domain
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
I'm not sure that's entirely true
We make predictions about social systems too
And there's a lot of faith about the generalizability of our predictions 
-
-
Replying to @eigenrobot @danlistensto
Honestly, I just meant that when grouping things together, even if the grouping points to something interesting and important it can also blur another important distinction - and that's what I think happens when we call secular meaning-making frameworks religions.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
By the way, we could use a good term for meaning-making-framwork, that does not have negative connotations (like ideology) or supernatural-ritual connotations (like religion). I'm out of ideas though.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.