Ben Shapiro's end of the year Devil Talk

[FireDragon76]

Yeah, the 'Hiddeness of God' issue is one we all have to deal with.

Satan's work, on the other hand, comes a dime a dozen and many folks seem to be more than happy to give their right hand to help him out with it.

God isn't so much hidden as certain people have just reckoned they can get along without God, or any analogous concept.

People have had spiritual beliefs for at least 40,000 years, if not longer (it's quite likely so), but suddenly in the last 300 years a few "enlightened" individuals decide it's all nonsense. Maybe this is just temporal chauvenism, and not a reflection of enlightenment.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

God isn't so much hidden as certain people have just reckoned they can get along without God, or any analogous concept.

I was making an allusion to Pascal's notions about God's Hiddenness rather than to the more contemporary versions of the argument brought forth by folks like J.L. Schellenberg. But I guess the later can be cited along with the former, too, in this case.

People have had spiritual beliefs for at least 40,000 years, if not longer (it's quite likely so), but suddenly in the last 300 years a few "enlightened" individuals decide it's all nonsense. Maybe this is just temporal chauvenism, and not a reflection of enlightenment.

Nah. I think it's the ever increasing trust in the idea that "man is the measure" which has increasingly come to roost in the world, both in the West and and now the East, over the past several hundred years. The Enlightenment was but a stage which this increase in measure about our own humanistic efficacy went through.

So now, here we are, in ever increasing measure of unbelief.

 

[FireDragon76]

I was making an allusion to Pascal's notions about God's Hiddenness rather than to the more contemporary versions of the argument brought forth by folks like J.L. Schellenberg. But I guess the later can be cited along with the former, too, in this case.


Nah. I think it's the ever increasing trust in the idea that "man is the measure" which has increasingly come to roost in the world, both in the West and and now the East, over the past several hundred years. The Enlightenment was but a stage which this increase in measure about our own humanistic efficacy went through.

So now, here we are, in ever increasing measure of unbelief.

I wouldn't go so far as that. Maybe in China. India is still a country with vibrant religions and spirituality that is vast and deep, surpassing the United States in that regard, where Christianity in the US has tended towards shallowness. Even India's national anthem is actually a Brahmo hymn to God (Brahmo Samaj was an Indian religious reform movement analogous to Unitarian-Universalism. Indeed, in the US there are a few UU ministers that are Brahmo in background). And Indian religious sentiments have fewer problems with modern science or religious pluralism, so there aren't the same dynamics that have destabilized Christendom.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Nah. I think it's the ever increasing trust in the idea that "man is the measure" which has increasingly come to roost in the world, both in the West and and now the East, over the past several hundred years. The Enlightenment was but a stage which this increase in measure about our own humanistic efficacy went through.

So now, here we are, in ever increasing measure of unbelief.

I see that mindset (that "man is the measure"), not even a notion taught as such for one's consideration, anymore, but pervasive through philosophy and even in scientific thought —certainly in the soft sciences but also, and particularly, physics and cosmology. Admittedly, the 'science writers' may not be conveying the true science that is going on, but the notions I do hear from them invoke the idea that reality depends on the mind.

Is human consciousness creating reality?

Is the physical universe independent from us, or is it created by our minds, as suggested by scientist Robert Lanza?

bigthink.com

Boltzmann brain - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

New controversial theory suggests that our past, present and future all exist simultaneously

Here's an interesting thought. What if you were told that everything in your life has already been planned out?

ideapod.com

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I wouldn't go so far as that. Maybe in China. India is still a country with vibrant religions and spirituality that is vast and deep, surpassing the United States in that regard, where Christianity in the US has tended towards shallowness.

I think this is a sweeping generalization for both India and the U.S. and is aloof of the overall facts of the matter.

Let's not make it sound like Hinduism doesn't cause its own headaches among its masses in India or that all Christians in the U.S. are by some logical stretch all superficial. You're just showing your emotive preferences here by casting this sort of unilateral shadow of aspersion.

Maybe don't do that? You can do better.

Even India's national anthem is actually a Brahmo hymn to God (Brahmo Samaj was an Indian religious reform movement analogous to Unitarian-Universalism. Indeed, in the US there are a few UU ministers that are Brahmo in background). And Indian religious sentiments have fewer problems with modern science or religious pluralism, so there aren't the same dynamics that have destabilized Christendom.

Yes, the conceptual dynamics are different but that doesn't mean Hinduism is somehow "closer" to God than Christians are. You know and I know there are a large number of social and political variables at work in the U.S. that tend to hamper Christian "enthusiasm." Of course, one could say the same about India as well.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I see that mindset (that "man is the measure"), not even a notion taught as such for one's consideration, anymore, but pervasive through philosophy and even in scientific thought —certainly in the soft sciences but also, and particularly, physics and cosmology. Admittedly, the 'science writers' may not be conveying the true science that is going on, but the notions I do hear from them invoke the idea that reality depends on the mind.

Is human consciousness creating reality?

Is the physical universe independent from us, or is it created by our minds, as suggested by scientist Robert Lanza?

bigthink.com

Boltzmann brain - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

New controversial theory suggests that our past, present and future all exist simultaneously

Here's an interesting thought. What if you were told that everything in your life has already been planned out?

ideapod.com

Yeah, those are some good points. As we know, the dominant theme these days is that somehow we can "control" our world and thereby our lives. Usually, though, it ends up boiling down to who's going to make the money. "Don't touch the money!"

 

[FireDragon76]

I see that mindset (that "man is the measure"), not even a notion taught as such for one's consideration, anymore, but pervasive through philosophy and even in scientific thought —certainly in the soft sciences but also, and particularly, physics and cosmology. Admittedly, the 'science writers' may not be conveying the true science that is going on, but the notions I do hear from them invoke the idea that reality depends on the mind.

Is human consciousness creating reality?

Is the physical universe independent from us, or is it created by our minds, as suggested by scientist Robert Lanza?

bigthink.com

Boltzmann brain - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

New controversial theory suggests that our past, present and future all exist simultaneously

Here's an interesting thought. What if you were told that everything in your life has already been planned out?

ideapod.com

"Man is the measure" is about fifty years behind the curve. Today philosophers are talking about transhumanism and posthumanism.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

"Man is the measure" is about fifty years behind the curve. Today philosophers are talking about transhumanism and posthumanism.

For my part, I'm simply referring to this measure as a kind of simple meme that runs through the core of today's thinking. Obviously, the actual societal manifestations emerge in the guise of more Transhumanistic posturing.

 

[FireDragon76]

For my part, I'm simply referring to this measure as a kind of simple meme that runs through the core of today's thinking. Obviously, the actual societal manifestations emerge in the guise of more Transhumanistic posturing.

Alot of modern philosophy is opening up to the flaws of humanity, or the failure of materialist utopias. But that doesn't mean they trust "old time religion", either, much of which, esp. in its Reformed versions brewing in Switzerland, had an almost non-existant psychology or a primitive, mythical anthropology. It was more like the Christian Taliban, but few Christians in our culture can see that in stark relief (because we are so indebted to the legacy of the magesterial reformers). So it's no wonder that postmoderns are still spooked by religious talk. For hundreds of years, religious leaders did detestable things like speak out against vaccines due to smallpox being a necessary "punishment from God", or declare that lightening rods were blasphemies against divine providence.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Alot of modern philosophy is opening up to the flaws of humanity, or the failure of materialist utopias. But that doesn't mean they trust "old time religion", either, much of which, esp. in its Reformed versions brewing in Switzerland, had an almost non-existant psychology or a primitive, mythical anthropology. It was more like the Christian Taliban, but few Christians in our culture can see that in stark relief (because we are so indebted to the legacy of the magesterial reformers). So it's no wonder that postmoderns are still spooked by religious talk. For hundreds of years, religious leaders did detestable things like speak out against vaccines due to smallpox being a necessary "punishment from God", or declare that lightening rods were blasphemies against divine providence.

It's probably also the case that both Moderns and Post-moderns are spooked by any social and/or spiritual evaluations made by a guy named "John," which is why I think so many are working overtime to 'declaw' his pronouncements these days (ala Elaine Pagels or Bart Ehrman). Where 'belief' is being invested, it's the belief that all of "that kind of thing" must not be allowed to be seen or perceived as true.

As for declaring lightening rods to be blasphemies against divine providence, I can sympathize with the general notion, but not by the standards of 500 hundred years ago. Yet, today, now, there could be something to it, but as then as now, it depends on who, what, when, where, why and how those lightning rods are being used. I suppose that one never can be too careful with the manipulation of electro-magnetic forces or in how people trust the overall endeavors of technologists. A few sources [of dozens] that feed into my own perspective on this whole line of thought and bringing in a historical awarenes extending from Descartes to Mary Shelley to Today, are:

Ziolkowski, Theodore. "Science, Frankenstein, and myth." The Sewanee Review 89, no. 1 (1981): 34-56.​

​

Amarasingam, Amarnath. "Transcending technology: looking at futurology as a new religious movement." Journal of Contemporary Religion 23, no. 1 (2008): 1-16. [LINK to this ARTICLE]​

By contrast, there are those who, taking an Angel in one hand and a Devil in the other, proceed to speculate or evaluate in ways that I tend not to, as does

Rähme, Boris. (2020) Is transhumanism a religion?. Religion in the Age of Digitalization (pp. 119-134).​

Dorobantu, Marius. (2022) Artificial Intelligence and Religion: Recent Advances and Future Directions. [LINK to this ARTICLE]​

​

My repost to Dorobantu's speculation would probably be in the vain of something said by Schultze in his book, (particularly p. 85),

Schultze, Quentin J. (2002). Habits of the high-tech heart: Living virtuously in the information age. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.​

 

[zippy2006]

It’s the flip side of “If you’ve done your job right, people won’t be sure you’ve done anything at all.” That one’s old too, but I remember it as a quote from God in Futurama. So curious that the gods and the devils each seem to operate on a maxim of hiding their own existence.

Is there anything more than cynicism and emotional appeals in these posts? Postulating for the sake of argument that the devil does exist, would it or would it not be in his interest for the developed West to disbelieve in him?

 

[FireDragon76]

It's probably also the case that both Moderns and Post-moderns are spooked by any social and/or spiritual evaluations made by a guy named "John," which is why I think so many are working overtime to 'declaw' his pronouncements these days (ala Elaine Pagels or Bart Ehrman). Where 'belief' is being invested, it's the belief that all of "that kind of thing" must not be allowed to be seen or perceived as true.

As for declaring lightening rods to be blasphemies against divine providence, I can sympathize with the general notion, but not by the standards of 500 hundred years ago. Yet, today, now, there could be something to it, but as then as now, it depends on who, what, when, where, why and how those lightning rods are being used. I suppose that one never can be too careful with the manipulation of electro-magnetic forces or in how people trust the overall endeavors of technologists. A few sources [of dozens] that feed into my own perspective on this whole line of thought and bringing in a historical awarenes extending from Descartes to Mary Shelley to Today, are:

Ziolkowski, Theodore. "Science, Frankenstein, and myth." The Sewanee Review 89, no. 1 (1981): 34-56.​

​

Amarasingam, Amarnath. "Transcending technology: looking at futurology as a new religious movement." Journal of Contemporary Religion 23, no. 1 (2008): 1-16. [LINK to this ARTICLE]​

By contrast, there are those who, taking an Angel in one hand and a Devil in the other, proceed to speculate or evaluate in ways that I tend not to, as does

Rähme, Boris. (2020) Is transhumanism a religion?. Religion in the Age of Digitalization (pp. 119-134).​

Dorobantu, Marius. (2022) Artificial Intelligence and Religion: Recent Advances and Future Directions. [LINK to this ARTICLE]​

​

My repost to Dorobantu's speculation would probably be in the vain of something said by Schultze in his book, (particularly p. 85),

Schultze, Quentin J. (2002). Habits of the high-tech heart: Living virtuously in the information age. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.​

The Singularity has been called "the Rapture for nerds".

It's all religious mumbo-jumbo. Actual scientists like Noam Chomsky say that the underlying science behind machine learning is not analogous to how language actually works. True enough, most of these algorithms like Dall-e don't even understand something as simple as "draw a red box on top of a blue box" (and I tested that myself, having a Dall-e account, and Chomsky is correct).

I think a biblical analogy would be Pharaoh's magicians. They ultimately are talking up alot of BS to convince those in power to give them even more power, and try to direct our civilizations agenda towards their own conceptualization of their libertarian techno-utopia, which has a strange resemblance to Philip K. Dick's cyberpunk dystopias.

I watched an episode on the spiritual background of Philip K. Dick recently, on the Youtube channel, New Thinking Allowed. Dick's Quaker and Episcopalian backgrounds were discussed, and it helped me appreciate the religious allusions in his works.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

The Singularity has been called "the Rapture for nerds".

It's all religious mumbo-jumbo. Actual scientists like Noam Chomsky say that the underlying science behind machine learning is not analogous to how language actually works. True enough, most of these algorithms like Dall-e don't even understand something as simple as "draw a red box on top of a blue box" (and I tested that myself, having a Dall-e account, and Chomsky is correct).

I think a biblical analogy would be Pharaoh's magicians. They ultimately are talking up alot of BS to convince those in power to give them even more power, and try to direct our civilizations agenda towards their own conceptualization of their libertarian techno-utopia, which has a strange resemblance to Philip K. Dick's cyberpunk dystopias.

I watched an episode on the spiritual background of Philip K. Dick recently, on the Youtube channel, New Thinking Allowed. Dick's Quaker and Episcopalian backgrounds were discussed, and it helped me appreciate the religious allusions in his works.

Yes, I'm familiar with Chomsky, and there is some relevance to what he's said on some things. But in my comments above, Transhumanism is only about 1/3rd of the problem where Ethics and Science & Technology are concerned; that is, where the use of a "lightning rod" might be on the cusp of spiritual blasphemy, a value judgment that I think can be culled from that Theodore Ziolkowski article I cited without too much difficulty.

 

[gaara4158]

Is there anything more than cynicism and emotional appeals in these posts? Postulating for the sake of argument that the devil does exist, would it or would it not be in his interest for the developed West to disbelieve in him?

There’s about as much seriousness here as the concept warrants. I don’t know of what benefit it would be for an immortal of near-infinite power to hide from humanity. Plenty of humans are effective leaders in plain sight. Why would a supernatural being be weakened by our knowledge of its existence?

 

[zippy2006]

There’s about as much seriousness here as the concept warrants. I don’t know of what benefit it would be for an immortal of near-infinite power to hide from humanity. Plenty of humans are effective leaders in plain sight. Why would a supernatural being be weakened by our knowledge of its existence?

I don't sense much seriousness at all from you. Do you believe in spies or moles? When someone talks about spies do you say, "Oh yeah! People who intentionally hide their existence and/or identity! 'Not believing in spies is the work of spies' smh. 'If a mole has done their job right, people won't be sure they've done anything at all.' Plenty of humans are effective in plain sight. Why would anyone hide their existence?"

I don’t know of what benefit it would be for an immortal of near-infinite power to hide from humanity.

What benefit would it be for an "immortal of near-infinite power" to reveal themselves to humanity? How would revealing themselves best serve their purposes? Why would you think immaterial beings need to "hide" to remain undetected by materialists? What does it even mean to have "near-infinite power"? All questions you obviously need to think about.

You and Hans seem to have erected a particularly irrational echo chamber.

 

[Mark Quayle]

There’s about as much seriousness here as the concept warrants. I don’t know of what benefit it would be for an immortal of near-infinite power to hide from humanity. Plenty of humans are effective leaders in plain sight. Why would a supernatural being be weakened by our knowledge of its existence?

Edit. My bad. I didn't realize this was about the devil. I thought it was a comment on God.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Since you mentioned me, I shall also respond.

I don't sense much seriousness at all from you. Do you believe in spies or moles? When someone talks about spies do you say, "Oh yeah! People who intentionally hide their existence and/or identity! 'Not believing in spies is the work of spies' smh. 'If a mole has done their job right, people won't be sure they've done anything at all.' Plenty of humans are effective in plain sight. Why would anyone hide their existence?"

How seriously do you think we should take a thread about a fictional demon?*

What benefit would it be for an "immortal of near-infinite power" to reveal themselves to humanity? How would revealing themselves best serve their purposes? Why would you think immaterial beings need to "hide" to remain undetected by materialists? What does it even mean to have "near-infinite power"? All questions you obviously need to think about.

I don't know. I don't concern myself with non-material beings. I see no reason to give them any consideration.

You and Hans seem to have erected a particularly irrational echo chamber.

An echo chamber?

We (gaara and I) exchange a couple messages in a thread where everyone else is mid panic about the moral collapse of our society and you think that we're in an echo chamber?

As for "irrational", we weren't the ones making a big deal about a fictional demon.


*So I finally searched and skimmed the Wikipedia article about CS Lewis' book. Apparently "screwtape" is a fictional demon. The thread makes a little more sense now, but I have no interest in the writings of a second-rate pre-teen fantasy author.

 

[zippy2006]

How seriously do you think we should take a thread about a fictional demon?*

Congratulations, you have just committed the logical fallacy of begging the question. Your irrationality grows with each new post.

I don't know. I don't concern myself with non-material beings. I see no reason to give them any consideration.

To assert the non-existence of some thing is to concern yourself with it and to give it consideration.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

*So I finally searched and skimmed the Wikipedia article about CS Lewis' book. Apparently "screwtape" is a fictional demon. The thread makes a little more sense now, but I have no interest in the writings of a second-rate pre-teen fantasy author.

You can stop with the cheap asides at just about any time now, Hans. I take offense that you've stooped to describing C.S. Lewis as a "second-rate pre-teen fantasy author," and such a description of him, placed as it is in THIS THREAD, is offensive. It's also a cheap form of stonewalling. I'd going even so far as to say that it's a form of gaslighting, one used so as not to have to engage the Ethical and Epistemological and Semantic issues that might go into any one of us having to "deal with the Devil" in various ways. On the whole, The Screwtape Letters is no more an example of "pre-teen fantasy" than is Mary Shelley's, Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus.

Please stop with the cheap asides and the stonewalling.

Besides, all you're really doing is showing just how applicable chapter 1 of The Screwtape Letters is to your atheistic perception.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

There’s about as much seriousness here as the concept warrants. I don’t know of what benefit it would be for an immortal of near-infinite power to hide from humanity. Plenty of humans are effective leaders in plain sight. Why would a supernatural being be weakened by our knowledge of its existence?

Could it be for a reason similar to one which is exemplified by Communist spies (or any other 'kind' of spy, really), where they would want to remain unnoticed and effectively unhindered from their an essential, ongoing work of sabotage of humanity?

Yes, and in line with The Screwtape Letters, I think the Devil desires to remain hidden, at least camouflaged if even not outright remaining invisible to both the human eye and much of human scrutiny.