Scientists can't get us back before the big bang and are like, "no big deal, yo." No - that's not how it works. You don't know any more about why we exist than anyone else.
Meanwhile, I'll rely on trained people when I'm sick, not prayer, became one of those seems to work pretty well, the other not so much.
Conflating religion (a widely studied and understood topic) and science (as if the differences between the two are cigarette paper thin) is remarkably sloppy.
Thanks for the feedback. First things first: we actually don't understand gravity. Here's an overview generated by AI: "Scientists' understanding of gravity is still evolving, and they don't fully understand how it works. Gravity is one of the four fundamental forces in nature, along with electromagnetism, weak nuclear force, and strong nuclear force. While Isaac Newton's law of universal gravitation states that all objects with mass attract each other, scientists still don't know why gravity works."
And yes, science is remarkable. Medical science has been a marvel. And yes, we should, of course, rely on science to help us where it can. Where it cannot, and this was my point, is where mysticism, religion, etc. come into play - exactly as Ray Bradbury said.
I don't think I suggested that the difference between the two is "paper thin," rather I quoted Bradbury as saying they are two sides of the same coin. I would say that coin is called "?" because the ? motivates the search for answers. I heard one philosopher describe humanity as possessing a deep emptiness, which is what sets us, alone among species, to answer the big questions. Both science and religion attempt to do this; for centuries, the two were considered, essentially, the same thing. The came the Enlightenment and they separated. No matter. They both serve a purpose and it's valuable, in my opinion, to seek what we can from the pursuits of both.
Stating that they're the two sides of the same coin is an assertion, not a fact. Religions of the world like that analogy, because it suggests the legitimacy and equivalency of their faith.
It's true that experts don't understand how gravity works in the tiny quantum world, because there's no realistic experiment that could show a quantum version of gravity. And, yeah? I'm still happy that we have gravity, daily, it's real, and understood at other provable levels.
Yes, it's absolutely an assertion, not a fact. A way to thinking about how people approach big questions. As I said in the piece, I do not believe any religion offers a comprehensive or cogent worldview; science has done a much better job of discovering some of the mechanisms by which the world works, but it cannot address the ineffable, which is where my interest lies at the moment. By the way, nor do I think any religion sufficiently answers those matters, but at least it has a way of addressing them, first by acknowledging their reality, second by attempting to intergrate the ineffable into some sort of belief system. I think it's beautiful, and does not need to be demonstrably "true".
I think that not everyone needs a belief system. But some really do. For them it’s their entire foundation, it’s what they stand on, it’s what gives them stability. If Faith works for them and no harm comes to anyone else because of what they believe, I’m happy for them.
I imagine I've been guilty of critiquing belief systems of my loved ones because I erroneously presume everyone ought to be endeavoring to live as close to the truth as possible...the actual, hardwired truth, of whatever reality is, beyond our perceptions of it. I dunno if that's a conceit or a hope, but that's the side of it I always err upon. I just want to feel like I've tried to live an authentic life, not one mired in illusions, and I want that for my loved ones too...even if they don't. Which is my bad.
But I also agree that the energy of our thoughts, and our emotive output, may well be among the architects, perhaps the grandmaster, of reality itself.
There's that old adage that whatever you 'believe' at the end of your days, may end up being what happens to whatever that essence is that leaves the body upon expiration....if you think you'll be worm food, you might be. If you think there'll be harps and winged angels, there will be. And if you think you'll reincarnate as a grasshopper, you might. That thought, admittedly, doesn't exactly warm the heart cockles, I admit.
But I think some aspect of the bare truth is, what we believe, isn't nearly as important as what we feel in our hearts. In the end, emotions win out over brains, every time. Whether that's monkey brained mammalian primal evolution or if it's ethereal mojo cased within our meat bags of stardust and water....nobody knows yet. I should rephrase that...some people, I think, odds say, do actually know. A very few, I imagine. But most of us hairless apes do not.
I don't think atheists would be quite so adamant about "debunking" Christianity if Christians weren't so insistent on pushing their beliefs on the rest of us, especially via elected office. I'm not a believer, but I'm not a militant atheist either - their whole tone strikes me as pretty gauche - but having grown up forced to attend a church whose stories ultimately didn't hold much water for me, I understand the urge to rebel.
This is exactly it. I couldn't care less what anyone believes, but when their belief and the religion they support finds it's way into school and government policy, when it starts harming people and affecting women's rights... Obviously that's bad and it should never have been allowed to get to that point. Magical beliefs of that sort have a way of building on themselves and allowing for harmful thought based outside reality. This is the kind of thinking that allows people to believe any little lie that comes out of a fascist's mouth and create the cult of Trump or people like him.
Sure, I agree with the revulsion towards evangelizing, regardless of the religion. But that's not really relevant to the piece. I'm against orthodoxy, as I said, regardless of its source. I'm also against one's personal religious beliefs affecting other people's lives. At the same time, I've become much more tolerant of all religion because I think I've gained a better appreciation in the last few years of the power of myth, and the way story informs reality and vice versa.
When my sister died my TV began acting erratically, turning itself on in the middle of the night, I would wake up to the glow from the other room. I thought it was just a glitch, certainly nothing related to her passing. It stopped not long after. Then, nine months later, my wife’s mother died, and the television began doing the same thing. Lasted a week or two. It wasn’t until then that my wife reminded me of the last time it had happened (my sister’s death). No idea if it’s anything, certainly could just be glitch and coincidence, but I like to believe it’s… something. Mystery, spiritual energy, and love as options, are all more life-affirming than “technical glitch.”
My mother took over my car sound system after she died, randomly playing tracks via Bluetooth that had disappeared from my phone several years and “upgrades” ago. My daughter has had similar experiences. No one will ever convince us otherwise—nor should anyone even try, as Michael notes.
Huh. Very weird. (Not in the GOP sense of the word.) So many people report inexplicable events around death. My wife has a story like that, too. Not TV-related, but strange nonetheless.
Whenever I try to drill down on religion - what it is, the purpose it serves - I tend to come back to Ernest Becker's Denial of Death. I don't think it's that complicated. "Since we're constantly on the brink of realizing that our existence is precarious, we cling to our culture's governmental, educational, and religious institutions and rituals to buttress our view of human life as uniquely significant and eternal." Sheldon Solomon. “Human beings are pattern-seeking animals who will prefer even a bad theory or a conspiracy theory to no theory at all.” Christopher Hitchens (I have enjoyed many of those debates! :) We fill in for what we don't know and that's dangerous at worse, delusional at best. There is all kinds of room, imo, for the "transcendant and the numinous" without having to nail any of it down in order to sleep at night.
I agree with Hitchens: we don't need to nail it down. In fact, if you're looking for sleepless nights -though I don't know why that would be desirous - a good way to achieve your goal would be to obsess over nailing things down. The fact is, we've been at for over 100,000 years as a species and we haven't nailed it down yet. Chances are, you're not going to be the one that figures it out. When we make peace with that, we can then go about enjoying the ways in which different people have tried to make sense of (gesturing to everything) this.
Been following this “tell an unbelievable ghost story that’s absolutely true” trend on TikTok - way after trend of course - there’s a range of wildness and probably some pretenders but thousands upon thousands of people have seen and heard some truly inexplicable stuff
If there is a God, I believe that he/she/they must be super annoyed for having put so much effort and time (a whole week!) into creating beings with the ability to think rationally but who nonetheless continue to believe in God.
It's just that the side of the coin with theology is always encroaching on the other side. It's been that way for millennia, still today. If we want to "stay in our lanes," great - but that's not what is happening. I give you several laws passed recently and a decision or two from SCOTUS as proof (although secular in nature, they are fundamentally faith arguments).
And I get it, we are empty of knowledge in comparison to what there is to know. But everyday, that emptiness is filled a tiny bit, tossing out faith and belief bit by bit. And long engrained beliefs are almost impossible to shake. But as Einstein showed, what is must be accepted even if it turns our stomachs.
P.S. It's funny that each of those podcasts linked to were selling books...
Sure, but I'm not making an argument about the appropriateness of the ecclesiastical in secular life, only observing the (in my opinion) unnecessary tension between the two.
And that's my point, the ecclesiastical has been stomping around in our garden for thousands of years and now when it's pointed out, they (the immature vocal they) cry foul. I guess I'm just saying the tension between the two is natural because one side is growing and evolving while another is not.
My only beef with religion (well, not the only one) is their judgmental stance on everyone & anything. Literally, no one knows what the hell is going on pertaining to the afterlife, or for that matter, this life! The only glimpses we get are the little mysteries you’re describing. I’ve had several unexplained, surprising moments, and it only leads to more curiosity & wonder. So, maybe if religious people (not all of them) would stop judging the shit out of everything/one, we wouldn’t be so turned off. And yes, it sounds like I’m judging them, but I’m just stating the obvious, I find all religions very cool as a study of history, anthropology, philosophy, psychology, etc.
I think this is exactly where the problem lies. As the secular and scientific worlds slowly expand and stake out new territory, especially in some areas where it was once only the province of religion and faith, religion freaks out and doubles down on its unprovable claims. In the past few decades I've seen more and more apologias attempting to use of facts and archaeological finds, even logic (which imo should be anathema to religion) to explain faith. I'm not sure where that's going but it's definitely not helping the case.
I'm not sure that religion isn't also "growing and evolving," but I hear you. Of course, the religious could say that the secular have been stomping around in their garden for centuries, as well.
Heh. Look we've actually jumped into the myth itself - the Garden. The Fruit of Knowledge. It gives a new look to the choice doesn't it? Pick a side, deal with the advantages and disadvantages of each.
It would be so cool if you offered yourself reading each post simply into your phone for your premium subscribers. I hate listening to the AI voice when I’m in the car and not able to sit and read. I know a number of Substack writers doing this. And we all love your real voice. That’s why we’re fans in the first place!
Not for nothing, but the "new atheists" (especially Sam Harris) are kind of jerks.
Scientists can't get us back before the big bang and are like, "no big deal, yo." No - that's not how it works. You don't know any more about why we exist than anyone else.
I'm pretty sure we do understand gravity.
Meanwhile, I'll rely on trained people when I'm sick, not prayer, became one of those seems to work pretty well, the other not so much.
Conflating religion (a widely studied and understood topic) and science (as if the differences between the two are cigarette paper thin) is remarkably sloppy.
Thanks for the feedback. First things first: we actually don't understand gravity. Here's an overview generated by AI: "Scientists' understanding of gravity is still evolving, and they don't fully understand how it works. Gravity is one of the four fundamental forces in nature, along with electromagnetism, weak nuclear force, and strong nuclear force. While Isaac Newton's law of universal gravitation states that all objects with mass attract each other, scientists still don't know why gravity works."
And yes, science is remarkable. Medical science has been a marvel. And yes, we should, of course, rely on science to help us where it can. Where it cannot, and this was my point, is where mysticism, religion, etc. come into play - exactly as Ray Bradbury said.
I don't think I suggested that the difference between the two is "paper thin," rather I quoted Bradbury as saying they are two sides of the same coin. I would say that coin is called "?" because the ? motivates the search for answers. I heard one philosopher describe humanity as possessing a deep emptiness, which is what sets us, alone among species, to answer the big questions. Both science and religion attempt to do this; for centuries, the two were considered, essentially, the same thing. The came the Enlightenment and they separated. No matter. They both serve a purpose and it's valuable, in my opinion, to seek what we can from the pursuits of both.
Stating that they're the two sides of the same coin is an assertion, not a fact. Religions of the world like that analogy, because it suggests the legitimacy and equivalency of their faith.
It's true that experts don't understand how gravity works in the tiny quantum world, because there's no realistic experiment that could show a quantum version of gravity. And, yeah? I'm still happy that we have gravity, daily, it's real, and understood at other provable levels.
Yes, it's absolutely an assertion, not a fact. A way to thinking about how people approach big questions. As I said in the piece, I do not believe any religion offers a comprehensive or cogent worldview; science has done a much better job of discovering some of the mechanisms by which the world works, but it cannot address the ineffable, which is where my interest lies at the moment. By the way, nor do I think any religion sufficiently answers those matters, but at least it has a way of addressing them, first by acknowledging their reality, second by attempting to intergrate the ineffable into some sort of belief system. I think it's beautiful, and does not need to be demonstrably "true".
With or without religion, with or without science, the universe will remain ineffable. That's extraordinary enough for the average human life span.
Why the need for a belief system?
As DFW said: 'this is water'.
I think that not everyone needs a belief system. But some really do. For them it’s their entire foundation, it’s what they stand on, it’s what gives them stability. If Faith works for them and no harm comes to anyone else because of what they believe, I’m happy for them.
If no harm comes to anyone else because of what they believe ... and there's the kicker.
No one has ever been harmed by believing in maths or the merits of dental health.
A fair analysis, Mike. :)
We definitely don't know shit yet.
I imagine I've been guilty of critiquing belief systems of my loved ones because I erroneously presume everyone ought to be endeavoring to live as close to the truth as possible...the actual, hardwired truth, of whatever reality is, beyond our perceptions of it. I dunno if that's a conceit or a hope, but that's the side of it I always err upon. I just want to feel like I've tried to live an authentic life, not one mired in illusions, and I want that for my loved ones too...even if they don't. Which is my bad.
But I also agree that the energy of our thoughts, and our emotive output, may well be among the architects, perhaps the grandmaster, of reality itself.
There's that old adage that whatever you 'believe' at the end of your days, may end up being what happens to whatever that essence is that leaves the body upon expiration....if you think you'll be worm food, you might be. If you think there'll be harps and winged angels, there will be. And if you think you'll reincarnate as a grasshopper, you might. That thought, admittedly, doesn't exactly warm the heart cockles, I admit.
But I think some aspect of the bare truth is, what we believe, isn't nearly as important as what we feel in our hearts. In the end, emotions win out over brains, every time. Whether that's monkey brained mammalian primal evolution or if it's ethereal mojo cased within our meat bags of stardust and water....nobody knows yet. I should rephrase that...some people, I think, odds say, do actually know. A very few, I imagine. But most of us hairless apes do not.
Yet. :)
I don't think atheists would be quite so adamant about "debunking" Christianity if Christians weren't so insistent on pushing their beliefs on the rest of us, especially via elected office. I'm not a believer, but I'm not a militant atheist either - their whole tone strikes me as pretty gauche - but having grown up forced to attend a church whose stories ultimately didn't hold much water for me, I understand the urge to rebel.
This is exactly it. I couldn't care less what anyone believes, but when their belief and the religion they support finds it's way into school and government policy, when it starts harming people and affecting women's rights... Obviously that's bad and it should never have been allowed to get to that point. Magical beliefs of that sort have a way of building on themselves and allowing for harmful thought based outside reality. This is the kind of thinking that allows people to believe any little lie that comes out of a fascist's mouth and create the cult of Trump or people like him.
Sure, I agree with the revulsion towards evangelizing, regardless of the religion. But that's not really relevant to the piece. I'm against orthodoxy, as I said, regardless of its source. I'm also against one's personal religious beliefs affecting other people's lives. At the same time, I've become much more tolerant of all religion because I think I've gained a better appreciation in the last few years of the power of myth, and the way story informs reality and vice versa.
When my sister died my TV began acting erratically, turning itself on in the middle of the night, I would wake up to the glow from the other room. I thought it was just a glitch, certainly nothing related to her passing. It stopped not long after. Then, nine months later, my wife’s mother died, and the television began doing the same thing. Lasted a week or two. It wasn’t until then that my wife reminded me of the last time it had happened (my sister’s death). No idea if it’s anything, certainly could just be glitch and coincidence, but I like to believe it’s… something. Mystery, spiritual energy, and love as options, are all more life-affirming than “technical glitch.”
My mother took over my car sound system after she died, randomly playing tracks via Bluetooth that had disappeared from my phone several years and “upgrades” ago. My daughter has had similar experiences. No one will ever convince us otherwise—nor should anyone even try, as Michael notes.
Huh. Very weird. (Not in the GOP sense of the word.) So many people report inexplicable events around death. My wife has a story like that, too. Not TV-related, but strange nonetheless.
Also, was I ever reminded of those Time-Life “book” tv commercials in the 80s and 90s for their proto X-Files conspiracy bullshit
Michael…
Does the same conclusion exist when the varient of “faith” is a religion other than Christianity?
I think you’re getting Stockholm Syndrome down in Savannah.
Whenever I try to drill down on religion - what it is, the purpose it serves - I tend to come back to Ernest Becker's Denial of Death. I don't think it's that complicated. "Since we're constantly on the brink of realizing that our existence is precarious, we cling to our culture's governmental, educational, and religious institutions and rituals to buttress our view of human life as uniquely significant and eternal." Sheldon Solomon. “Human beings are pattern-seeking animals who will prefer even a bad theory or a conspiracy theory to no theory at all.” Christopher Hitchens (I have enjoyed many of those debates! :) We fill in for what we don't know and that's dangerous at worse, delusional at best. There is all kinds of room, imo, for the "transcendant and the numinous" without having to nail any of it down in order to sleep at night.
I agree with Hitchens: we don't need to nail it down. In fact, if you're looking for sleepless nights -though I don't know why that would be desirous - a good way to achieve your goal would be to obsess over nailing things down. The fact is, we've been at for over 100,000 years as a species and we haven't nailed it down yet. Chances are, you're not going to be the one that figures it out. When we make peace with that, we can then go about enjoying the ways in which different people have tried to make sense of (gesturing to everything) this.
Right? "Let the Mystery Be" - Iris Dement :)
Right. And when the mystery is dispelled, let it be. pdm
Been following this “tell an unbelievable ghost story that’s absolutely true” trend on TikTok - way after trend of course - there’s a range of wildness and probably some pretenders but thousands upon thousands of people have seen and heard some truly inexplicable stuff
If there is a God, I believe that he/she/they must be super annoyed for having put so much effort and time (a whole week!) into creating beings with the ability to think rationally but who nonetheless continue to believe in God.
It's just that the side of the coin with theology is always encroaching on the other side. It's been that way for millennia, still today. If we want to "stay in our lanes," great - but that's not what is happening. I give you several laws passed recently and a decision or two from SCOTUS as proof (although secular in nature, they are fundamentally faith arguments).
And I get it, we are empty of knowledge in comparison to what there is to know. But everyday, that emptiness is filled a tiny bit, tossing out faith and belief bit by bit. And long engrained beliefs are almost impossible to shake. But as Einstein showed, what is must be accepted even if it turns our stomachs.
P.S. It's funny that each of those podcasts linked to were selling books...
Sure, but I'm not making an argument about the appropriateness of the ecclesiastical in secular life, only observing the (in my opinion) unnecessary tension between the two.
And that's my point, the ecclesiastical has been stomping around in our garden for thousands of years and now when it's pointed out, they (the immature vocal they) cry foul. I guess I'm just saying the tension between the two is natural because one side is growing and evolving while another is not.
My only beef with religion (well, not the only one) is their judgmental stance on everyone & anything. Literally, no one knows what the hell is going on pertaining to the afterlife, or for that matter, this life! The only glimpses we get are the little mysteries you’re describing. I’ve had several unexplained, surprising moments, and it only leads to more curiosity & wonder. So, maybe if religious people (not all of them) would stop judging the shit out of everything/one, we wouldn’t be so turned off. And yes, it sounds like I’m judging them, but I’m just stating the obvious, I find all religions very cool as a study of history, anthropology, philosophy, psychology, etc.
I think this is exactly where the problem lies. As the secular and scientific worlds slowly expand and stake out new territory, especially in some areas where it was once only the province of religion and faith, religion freaks out and doubles down on its unprovable claims. In the past few decades I've seen more and more apologias attempting to use of facts and archaeological finds, even logic (which imo should be anathema to religion) to explain faith. I'm not sure where that's going but it's definitely not helping the case.
I’m down with awe, but not delusion.
I don't know - delusion is sounding better and better these days.
I feel you.
I'm not sure that religion isn't also "growing and evolving," but I hear you. Of course, the religious could say that the secular have been stomping around in their garden for centuries, as well.
Heh. Look we've actually jumped into the myth itself - the Garden. The Fruit of Knowledge. It gives a new look to the choice doesn't it? Pick a side, deal with the advantages and disadvantages of each.
Christopher Hitchens must have made bank on those debates.
It would be so cool if you offered yourself reading each post simply into your phone for your premium subscribers. I hate listening to the AI voice when I’m in the car and not able to sit and read. I know a number of Substack writers doing this. And we all love your real voice. That’s why we’re fans in the first place!
Or Martha!