Category: Religion

The Path of Enkinema

Mark Davis1 Comment

 

 

There’s a sickening vertigo to the MAGA-scape at the theoretical edge where phrases like “administrative state” and “managerial class” get bandied about as a way of opposing thought leadership in favor of raw aggression. It’s both a new authoritarian playbook and a categorization system that is deceptive in its impotence because there always needs to be careful thought in our complex societies; oh, how conservatives once loved the nuances of “unintended consequences” as a way of poisoning the well of change. We see this in the whiplash over foreign policy ideology (America first, damn the struggles of the world) and the reality of being active participants in the new struggles of great powers where mercurial Trump keeps lashing out, retracting, and slashing awkwardly again. We see little resembling the hallmarks of Christian humility or compassion, just performative gestures that rely on the thin gruel of culture-war complaints to interpenetrate governance and aggressive posturing.

It’s different from before, sterile and mean, like the revelatory queasiness of grainy 4:3 Cops or Maury Povich in the 90s.

Given all this, I thought it might help mightily to start a new religion that takes over and displaces all this antagonism, a way of restructuring the worldwide mind around modern insights. It’s a fool’s errand, I know. Our most recent examples of cults and mini-religions all have revolved around deceit and control—even the political cult of MAGA—so trying to displace it all might be inverting the mechanisms that really drive religious success and spiritual change. But it makes a fun side-project when I’m not writing other things or coding.

I was in a taxi crawling and dodging through central Bangkok today and the wizened driver was both texting cute furry emojis and watching streaming video of the news on the center console of his Toyota!… Read the rest

All Hail Evolved Irrationality

Mark DavisLeave a comment

From an impersonal distance, watching other people make decisions is always interesting. They may apply reason and passion in varied measures to figure out a way forward, or a lifestyle, or even fashion choices. Often they mindfully weigh the choices and decide to moderate even that process, committing to a radical path that has drama and uncertainty. It’s sometimes better to be interesting than cautious and correct. As a virtue this recalls the romantic movements that arose in opposition to the mechanization of the 19th century as trains and steamships criss-crossed the world. Order and peace were at odds with drama, passion, faith, and love that are somehow in our core, animalistic nature.

Motifs of uncertainty crept into science and reason as we transitioned into the 20th century, from the stochastic rumble of thermodynamics, to the realigning of basic concepts like gravity as a space-time curvature, and then the wave-particle duality of quantum reality. The clockwork of the universe that was so oppressively mechanistic showed fuzzy edges and knotty intersections that defied ordinary-scale expectations. The combined mathematical realizations of incompleteness and algorithmic uncomputability overlaid the investigations of the physical to such an extent that new theories were developed that proposed that the quantum world and mind are inextricably laced together; subjective and objective do not exist independently.

Even as our knowledge and management of the universe has grown, there is a background roil of irrationality, like the primal chaos of Tiamat. Human thought has a collection of ways of organizing the world that appear to be natural consequences of our social development. Religious belief is a widespread catalyst for building predictable and supportive communities by slaving our baser tendencies to coordinating strictures, obligations, and status maintenance.… Read the rest

Time, Consciousness, and Joy in 2025

Mark Davis2 Comments

A glorious 2025 comes roaring in despite the nastiness of contemporary American and (some) worldwide politics. Everyone’s angry, despite the ingenious control of murderous pathogens, the brilliant performance of the post-COVID economic recovery in the United States, dropping crime rates, and the continued progress on reducing and eliminating worldwide poverty. But these are aggregate measures of social and scientific success and far too many individuals remain discontented with their own status and fears that social forces beyond their control are limiting their success and happiness.

In this, one must be circumspect: reading out stats that contradict the mood is not reading the room. So, instead, I try to focus on unexpected innovations that lead us to defocus on our own situational context and instead find a larger reimagining. This is a modern therapy that isn’t dismissive of the effectiveness of our highly successful institutions of scientific achievement, peace-preserving world orders, and liberal democracies that effectively balance individual freedoms against order. It’s a celebration of them, instead.

I give you two new joys as the new year starts to build. First, we have the novel realization that dark energy and matter might be better explained by relativistic distortions of space-time in the universe based on the quantities of matter in denser versus void-like areas of space. Here’s Anton Petrov with a primer:

This certainly simplifies things if true, but it needs to be observationally verified and reconsidered if it doesn’t pan out. There’s that underlying joy in science: everything is tentative because we are all flawed.

The second development changes from an external focus on the monumental scale of the universe to something much more human. I’ve previously covered the curious theory of quantum consciousness proposed by Roger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff, but there have been some recent developments.… Read the rest

Deep Zombies

Mark Davis1 Comment

There is a slang nominal form of the word “deepening” for when a person seems to be purposefully adding awe, mystery, and unknowns to their arguments: deepenings. It often arises in discourse on religion and mystical experiences. As a child in the 70s we had Bigfoot, Nessy, the Bermuda Triangle, UFOs, near-death experiences, and the strange stuff from Velikovsky, von Däniken, and Sitchin. The books and movies built deepenings into communities and businesses just as surely as Catholicism, Mormonism, or Scientology have done. There is a human desire for mystery. But it doesn’t make the mysteries true. But many religious folks hold on to thin threads that point towards mystery as an added data point for justifying their faiths as real, true, valuable, and beautiful.

Given this, I was curious about David Bentley Hart’s All Things are Gods: The Mysteries of Mind and Life after Ross Douthat praised it at New York Times. It’s a big book and I’ve just skimmed around a fair bit so far, but there is a repetition of an error (among the extensive repetitions in the volume) concerning the mind-body problem that is also related to arguments from Alvin Plantinga concerning evolution. Specifically, the notion of philosophical zombies is largely irrelevant I think to claiming that subjective experience (“what it’s like…”) is non-material or of a distinct nature from the brain and the nervous system. Given what we know about evolutionary development, I don’t think that we can even conceive of a p-zombie in the way it was originally proposed.

We might try to imagine an evolutionary development of homo sapiens that does not include this subjective experience, but that would not lead to an identical human sans the qualia-experiencer because the developmental trajectory would have to be different, resulting in differing brains.… Read the rest

Causally Emergent vs. Divine Spark Murder Otherwises

Mark DavisLeave a comment

One might claim that a metaphysical commitment to strong determinism is only porous to quantum indeterminacy or atomic indeterminacy (decay behavior for instance). Those two can be lumped together and simply called subatomic indeterminacy or something. Everything else is conceptually derivative of state evolution and therefore deterministic. So does that mean that my model for R fails unless I can invoke these two candidates? My suggestion of amplifying thermodynamic noise doesn’t really cut the mustard (an amusing semantic drift from pass muster, perhaps) because it only appears random and solely characterizable by these macroscopic variables like pressure and temperature, not because it actually is random in the molecule swirl.

But I can substitute an atomic decay counter for my thermodynamic amplifier, or use a quantum random number generator based on laser measurements of vacuum fluctuations. There, I’ve righted the ship, though I’ve jettisoned my previous claim that randomness is not necessary for R’s otherwises. Now it is, but it is not sufficient because of the need for a device like the generative subsystem that uses randomness in a non-arbitrary way to revise decisions. We do encounter a difficulty in porting subatomic indeterminacy into a human analog, of course, though some have given it a try.

But there is some new mathematics for causal emergence that fits well with my model. In causal emergence, ideas like necessity and sufficiency for causal explanations can be shown to have properties in macroscale explanations that are not present at microscales. The model used is a simple Markov chain that flips between two states and information theory is applied to examine a range of conceptual structures for causation running from David Hume’s train of repeating objects (when one damn thing comes after another and then again and again, we may have a cause), up through David Lewis’s notion of counterfactuals in alternative probabilistic universes (could it have happened that way in all possible worlds?),… Read the rest

A Manifold of Non-Tiresome Heavens

Mark Davis1 Comment

It’s the rage these days to wax indignant over the rise of authoritarian figures around the world. From Trump to Putin, Victor Orban, and the right-wing parties of Europe, the fear is that our experiment in post-World War II and then post-Cold War liberalism is at risk of being distorted and abraded by a desire for cultural uniformity. A common refrain is that the visibility of and legal restructuring around LGBTQ+ and ethnic/minority communities, as well as a sprinkling of environmentalism, is moving so quickly that a slight majority of the electorate wants to stand in the path of change “yelling stop,” to paraphrase Bill Buckley. Ripple effects then will break down the slow-built institutions that define contemporary liberal democracies and soon we have concentration camps for dissenters.

In America, there are nostalgic swoons for Ronald Reagan and some idealized middle-class heaven from the economic growth-phase of the 1950s when everyone went to church and the worst swear word was “golly gee!” The uniformity and comfort that people felt about their roles in their communities combined with a bedrock belief in family, faith, and devotion to country that was as reliable as America’s continuous economic growth. It was good to be alive and all the backward peoples of the world would maybe someday catch up if they didn’t all die of famine first.

But I can never quite understand what those who lean authoritarian want for their future world? I call most of the hypothetical visions “tiresome heavens” because they reflect the old joke of how Christian heaven must be a monotonous, uniform place. Just sit around in perfect blissful union with one’s Creator. Nothing really to do, no stressors, no wants, no struggles; it is a transcendent promise that is more geologic than human.… Read the rest

When the Cranes Cry

Mark Davis1 Comment

The crane has a symbolic resonance in Celtic mythology. A magician, assuming an elaborate pose—one eye open and one leg drawn up—was said to see into the otherworld, just as the crane itself moved from sky to land to water. But there is the other meaning of the word crane: the ancient lifting contraption that helped build Greece and likely had a role in Egypt and Sumeria before that. And now they protrude into the urban sky, raising up our buildings and even other cranes as we densify our cities. It was this mechanical meaning that Dan Dennett at Tufts chose to contrast with conceptual skyhooks, the unsupported contrivances that save protagonists in plays by dangling gods above the stage. For Dennett, the building crane is the metaphor we should apply to the mindless, simple algorithm of evolution. The algorithm raises up species and thus creates our mysterious ideas about meaning and purpose. No skyhooks or Deus ex Machina are needed.

Dennett passed away at 82 in Maine leaving a legacy as a public intellectual who engaged in the pursuit of reason throughout his adult career. He was committed to the idea that this world—this teeming ensemble of living matter—is intrinsically miraculous, built up by something dead simple into all the convolutions and perilous ideas that we now use to parse its mysteries. He was one of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse during the so-called New Atheism craze of 2008-2010, along with Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Sam Harris, but even then he was committed to the crane metaphor to displace these ancient skyhooks of belief rather than, say, a satirical impact-analysis of religion a la Hitchens.

There is another phrase that Dennett championed in Darwin’s Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meanings of Life: universal acid.… Read the rest

The Rubbery Road from Original Position to Metaphysical Naturalism

Mark Davis1 Comment

From complaints about student protests over Israel in Gaza, to the morality of new House Speaker Johnson, and even to the reality and consequences of economic inequality, there is a dynamic conversation in the media over what is morally right and, importantly, why it should be considered right. It’s perfectly normal for those discussions and considered monologues to present ideas, cases, and weigh the consequences to American life, power, and the well-being of people around the world. It also demonstrates the fact that ideas like divine command theory become irrelevant for most if not all of these discussions since they still require secular analysis and resolution. Contributions from the Abrahamic faiths (and similarly from Hindu nationalism) are largely objectionable moral ideas (“The Chosen People,” jihad, anti-woman, etc.) that are inherently preferential and exclusionary.

Indeed, this public dialogue perhaps best shows how modern people build ethical systems. It looks mostly like Rawl’s concept of “reflective equilibrium” with dashes of utilitarianism and occasional influences from religious tradition and sentiment. And reflective equilibrium has few foundational ideas beyond a basic commitment to fairness as justice using the “original position” as its starting point. That is, if we had to create a society with no advance knowledge about what our role and position might be within it (a veil of ignorance), the best for us would be to create an equal, fair, and just society.

So ethics is cognitively rubbery, with changing attachments and valences as we process options into a coherent whole. We might justify civilian deaths for a greater good when we have few options, imprecise weapons, and existential fear (say, the atom bomb in World War II).… Read the rest

Contrasts and Failures, Hope and Awe

Mark Davis2 Comments

Russell Moore writes in the Atlantic that American evangelicalism is in crisis. There is a Faustian pact of unholy MAGA politics, conspiracy theories, and religious feelings that can only be remedied with a revival of the faith itself, laser-focused on Moore’s conceptions of what Christianity should strive to become. He acknowledges that there is a dark history to America’s evangelical movement through the 20th century. It was always political in close focus, with the maintenance of racism and exclusion at its core well before abortion was even a talking point. Anti-Catholicism and antisemitism were equally bundled up with the evangelical mindset. Beyond the moral failings that sloshed into politics, there was the structural marketing of the faith by televangelists and traveling ministries that turned the hoped-for internal conversion into a more cynical plot:

In the end, a market-driven religion gives rise to a market-driven approach to truth, and this development ultimately eviscerated conservative Christianity in the US and left it the possession of hypocrites and hucksters.

I’m not at all surprised. As information has become unlocked from the vaults of academic pursuits by modern technologies, the ripples of uncertainty about faith claims have spread and clashed with the desire to totalize the political, personal, pragmatic, and moral dimensions of evangelical beliefs. If a thing is so unquestionably right and good, it must infiltrate and own the mind, the body, the soul, the community, and the nation. So why is the world drifting away, seemingly inexorably?

But even those who leave their faith communities feel adrift, clinging to vague spirituality or buffet gorging across traditions in search of something that is satisfactory but different. But that is only in the best of moments, when a song triggers nostalgia or late after eggnog on Christmas Eve.… Read the rest

Follow the Paths

Mark DavisLeave a comment

There is a little corner of philosophical inquiry that asks whether knowledge is justified based on all our other knowledge. This epistemological foundationalism rests on the concept that if we keep finding justifications for things we can literally get to the bottom of it all. So, for instance, if we ask why we think there is a planet called Earth, we can find reasons for that belief that go beyond just “’cause I know!” like “I sense the ground beneath my feet” and “I’ve learned empirically-verified facts about the planet during my education that have been validated by space missions.” Then, in turn, we need to justify the idea that empiricism is a valid way of attaining knowledge with something like, “It’s shown to be reliable over time.” This idea of reliability is certainly changing and variable, however, since scientific insights and theories have varied, depending on the domain in question and timeframe. And why should we in fact value our senses as being reliable (or mostly reliable) given what we know about hallucinations, apophenia, and optical illusions?

There is also a curious argument in philosophy that parallels this skepticism about the reliability of our perceptions, reason, and the “warrants” for our beliefs called the Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism (EAAN). I’ve previously discussed some aspects of EAAN, but it is, amazingly, still discussed in academic circles. In a nutshell it asserts that our reliable reasoning can’t be evolved because evolution does not reliably deliver good, truthful ways of thinking about the world.

While it may seem obvious that the evolutionary algorithm does not deliver or guarantee completely reliable facilities for discerning true things from false things, the notion of epistemological pragmatism is a direct parallel to evolutionary search (as Fitelson and Sober hint).… Read the rest