2. d. Darwin knocked out the natural history side of it. Genetics accelerated this. What’s left is, at best, the Taleb, Jung & Peterson approach. Taleb says religion encodes useful nowledge. Jung & Peterson say it’s psychologically true, i.e. ....
-
-
Show this thread
-
3. ...you’ve got believe in something, and it’s better to believe in this tried and tested thing than, say, communism, which has worse outcomes. The problem is that there’s more than psych truth. I also know that religion rests on shakey ideas.
Show this thread -
4. Even if I know it’s a psychological necessity, and there’s a need for the numinous. Further problem, it turns out that religion—Xtianity in particular—was a hidden animating force for the Enlightenment and science, because it prioritised truth.
Show this thread -
5. Now that we’ve lost Xtianity, we’ve also lost the grounds for pursuing truth in science (and everything). This partly accounts for our drift to scientism. The result is that we know we’re largely determined by evolution and, at some level, physics.
Show this thread -
6. We also know we have some capacity to make our own values and shape our environment—though this is itself cosntrained by cognitive biases, evolution and, ultimately, physics.
Show this thread -
7. So that’s what man is at the moment: We’re without God, without the idea of truth, stuck with provisional models that might be completely subverted by our ambivalent relationship to truth and our own biological biases.
Show this thread
End of conversation
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.