On "The end of enchantment" and the Enlightenment. I obviously disagree that ending animism or enchantment is a necessary product of reason; panpsychism is as old as Plato, and inherent in the Neoplatonic philosophy that I think is the closest human beings have gotten to the truth. Praise for the Frankfurt school strikes me as short-sighted, but it's worth reading all the same because of this insight:
[A] surprising 83.3 per cent of Americans believe in either guardian angels, demonic possession or ghosts, and there is evidence for similar belief patterns in western Europe. (I should note that disenchantment should not be confused with secularisation. The sociological evidence suggests that de-Christianisation, while usually equated with secularisation, often correlates with an increase in belief in spirits, ghosts and magic – not the reverse.) Nor are sociological surveys the only evidence. If one views Europe and North America through the same sort of anthropological lens that European and American anthropologists are used to directing abroad, it seems hard to defend the notion that the ‘modern West’ is straightforwardly disenchanted. There are plenty of examples.This pattern is older than the Frankfurt School, as it was known to Chesterton. Like Chesterton, we sit in a strange place with regards to it. On the one hand, Chesterton favored Roman Catholicism over some other variations of Christianity -- and especially materialism -- just because it offered him the opportunity to believe in faerie.
Walmart sells ‘Sage Spirit-Smudge Wands’ and clothing chains such as Urban Outfitters sell ‘healing crystals’ and tarot cards. You can go on eBay right now and pay an Australian ‘white witch’ to perform a ritual to summon a djinn and bind it to an object of your choice. Celebrities such as Anna Nicole Smith and Bobby Brown have publicly described having sex with ghosts. Coffee shops and co-ops throughout the US and much of western Europe display flyers advertising ‘palm readers’, ‘energy balancing’ and ‘chakra work’. Even if you ignore the Harry Potter craze and other fictionalised depictions of wizards, ghosts and witches, studies of American reading habits suggest that ‘New Age’ print culture is incredibly lucrative, with ‘non-fiction books’ about magic, guardian angels and near-death experiences frequently appearing in the upper echelons of Amazon’s bestseller lists. And the past 15 years have seen a proliferation of ‘reality’ television series that claim to report evidence for ghosts, psychics, extraterrestrials, monsters, curses and even miracles.
The Christian is quite free to believe that there is a considerable amount of settled order and inevitable development in the universe. But the materialist is not allowed to admit into his spotless machine the slightest speck of spiritualism or miracle. Poor Mr. McCabe is not allowed to retain even the tiniest imp, though it might be hiding in a pimpernel. The Christian admits that the universe is manifold and even miscellaneous, just as a sane man knows that he is complex. The sane man knows that he has a touch of the beast, a touch of the devil, a touch of the saint, a touch of the citizen. Nay, the really sane man knows that he has a touch of the madman. But the materialist’s world is quite simple and solid, just as the madman is quite sure he is sane.It seems as if there is a health that attends to belief in the imp, in the not-quite-settled and not-quite-understandable nature of reality. Which indeed there is; philosophy can sketch the limits of reason readily. Kant does so in his first critique, and prior philosophers come to the ineffable regularly. The worst thing to believe is that reality is purely rational, subject to human science, and completely comprehensible. Chesterton is not wrong to say that madness lies that way.
On the other hand, healing crystals are bunk, and the 'white witch' isn't really sending you a magic item with a bound jinn.
21 comments:
I had read before, but forgotten, that secularisation caused some increase in superstition rather than dampening it. We believe in something.
"On the other hand, healing crystals are bunk, and the 'white witch' isn't really sending you a magic item with a bound jinn."
When I encounter definitive statements such as this I bring up the placebo effect.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placebo
My conscious mind controls my fingers as I type this. My unconscious mind tends to my breathing and heart beat. When I type too fast and the keys get smoking hot my reflexes jerk my fingers away. There is a convincing body of observations that indicates that mind over matter is real. Except to those who lose business because of it.
Not for nothing the admonition about "curiosity"! There are limits to what we can--and should--know. Just ask Adam and Eve.
I'm a Christian of the Protestant flavor. I've also had experiences that lead me to believe that there are things that might not be literally "supernatural" but that I have no business sticking my fingers or nose into. Is what I'm sensing "demonic?" Perhaps not literally, but I'm quite willing to believe that evil, or intense and sustained negative emotions can leave traces and perhaps attract things humans should avoid doing business with.
It's not a good idea to summon spirits or try to call up supernatural forces. Something might answer, be it your own unconscious or something from outside. Neither seems to end well. (See: Saul and the Witch of Endor.)
LittleRed1
As with everything, it depends on why you came. If you came for wealth or power, you're in peril; but as the story of Tam Lin shows, sometimes you can find true love by daring the faerie.
Not for nothing the admonition about "curiosity"!
Oddly enough, Odin warns against curiosity too: in the Havamal, he twice warns that "man should be middle wise / never over-wise." Joy doesn't dwell in the heart of the man who learns too much, he says.
Parallels between the Christian story and the Odin story are of course well-known; most people think they were adapted into the Norse from the Gospels, but who knows?
When I encounter definitive statements such as this I bring up the placebo effect.
Sure, but that's a materialist explanation: the brain does it to itself. The crystals don't do anything that anything else couldn't have done, if you believed they would.
I've been to Jerusalem, and sat in the Holy Sepulchre. If what you feel there is just the placebo effect, that'd be a great shame. It's wiser I think, and healthier, not to reach for such explanations.
"I'm spiritual but not religious" is a very common self-definition among people under about 45, especially it seems among women.
Interestingly, this is pretty much what Faust told Gretchen (at much greater length, of course) when she asked if he was a believer in God before giving in to his seduction.
"Sure, but that's a materialist explanation: the brain does it to itself. The crystals don't do anything that anything else couldn't have done, if you believed they would."
Actually, it is anti-materialist. The material brain is demonstrably physically incapable of producing the observed behavior of humans or of animals. The mind, the self as in myself, is immaterial and exerts control over the vehicle which is our material body. Sometimes the soul needs to be reminded to attend to its knitting and take care of the body. Whatever the stimulus, be it sugar water or crystals or prayer, it is certainly not a material mechanism as posited by conventional medicine.
"I've been to Jerusalem, and sat in the Holy Sepulchre. If what you feel there is just the placebo effect, that'd be a great shame. It's wiser I think, and healthier, not to reach for such explanations."
I haven't been to Jerusalem but I've been here: https://tinyurl.com/y6reuehd . Awesome, as in instilling awe.
...The material brain is demonstrably physically incapable...
Chesterton's point is that a materialist explanation need not actually be able to explain. The "spotless machine" explains everything, even if we can't say just how. If it's the brain, then it's somehow the brain; we may not be able to say just how, but we (following Occam's razor) shouldn't posit an unobservable "soul" or "mind." Materialist philosophers phrase this as "the mind supervenes on the brain," that is, that everything we call the 'mind' is really just a function of the brain. The mind isn't necessary, it's just a word we use.
So the placebo effect must -- on the materialist understanding -- be about the brain. And the fact that the crystal isn't necessary suggests that this is at least somewhat plausible; it could be any placebo that would create this effect, not a particular rock.
Now, the placebo effect is real enough, so any adequate metaphysics would have to accept it. You could write a dualist explanation in which the soul is doing the work. The materialist one has to account for it too. Both end up being equally mysterious, but one of them is treated as scientific and the other as fantasy.
"but one of them is treated as scientific and the other as fantasy."
Which is sophistry of the highest order. The consensus of the "scientific" community is that the brain is analogous to a digital computer. We know the parameters and capabilities of the biological brain vis-a-vis a modern computer and it is apparent that the computer is many orders of magnitude more capable. Yet we note that in regard to pattern recognition, the focus of the AI hype, my dog spot runs circles around them.
Grim, I know that this series of articles is focused on philosophy, particularly the teachings of Aristotle, and I apologize for this non sequitur. The point is that I object to the invocation of authority to advance philosophical arguments. "We're scientists so we know" frosts me.
I've also been there a couple of times, Roy. I don't know when you were there last, but the more recent time I was there was a little less wonderful- development has crept up closer on the road below there, with several McMansions, one of which is particularly hideous. But the approach to the chapel and the chapel itself are wonderful places. One of the best 'modern' works of architecture I've been in (and more modern in the building technology and forms than in the movement sense, which is probably why).
My mind contains many parts, only one of which is rational. They all have to work together, if I'm to be sane, joyful, and spiritually healthy.
Douglas,
My first visit to the Church of the Red Rocks was about 50 years ago. Sedona was a sleepy little town, probably about 1/4 of the size it is now. The last time I visited was probably 15 years ago.
What struck me, and struck me hard, was its simplicity, its humility. The interior was plain, almost stark. It drew my eyes to the glory of the creation seen through the huge windows. It brought to mind a very popular song of the era, The Three Bells.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8t8YKGPXx4&feature=youtu.be
I think it was that experience that caused me to question my naive atheism, abandon my search for an ideology that simplified the world, opened my eyes.
I can guarantee the healing salt crystals work. My granddaughter gave me one with a
Lite inside. It was suppose to release negative ions or something. Don’t know if that works. But every time I see it , I think of her and I feel better.
Crystals work quite well for healing the quantum human energy body.
You have received the education of the West, which is to say, the indoctrination of the West. They are about as advanced in comprehension and wisdom as cargo cultists when they see Western airplanes.
The materialism of the "gun culture" is a different variation of that "might makes right" type of cultural belief. It is hitched to christian mysticism at times but it is not mysticism but materialism.
And the fact that the crystal isn't necessary suggests that this is at least somewhat plausible; it could be any placebo that would create this effect, not a particular rock.
Now, the placebo effect is real enough, so any adequate metaphysics would have to accept it.
It's not the placebo effect, that's due to human lack of comprehension of quantum energy fields and how Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle applies to Schroedinger's Cat box quandary. In other words, quantum physics necessitates that consciousness affects and creates reality states. This is called Will Power in the esoteric mysticism, or magic in the popular realm.
In the religious sphere, it is called prophetic miracles or prophecies, even self fulfilled prophecies.
This does not affect the gun culture world, because there it is all materialism. You hit the target with chemically propelled objects that obey deterministic trajectories. "Will" is only important for trigger finger control and breathing.
The human body is itself a type of crystal. Thus "crystals" do not in itself embody the quantum effect, given the human pov.
Much of the West's inability to understand itself, as I perceive it, it is due to modern Westerners lacking any comprehension of the esoteric spiritual oracles, daemons, and Workings of Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, etc. They learn the theory and the translation of the books, but they don't understand anything of the culture or the life, thus they can only comprehend the "virtues" intellectually, and even that is lacking.
but couldn't an AI serve to randomize your language just enough to ensure you weren't recognizable?
Wouldn't matter to those like me that can read the thoughts and emotions of a target via a variation of CIA researched Remote Viewing.
People can try to hide their thoughts and emotions from me online, but it is surprisingly difficult. If they write one line, it is like they have broadcasted their inner emotions for all to see. But I notice others do not see it. Nor can textual analysis account for all the details and accuracy obtained.
"People can try to hide their thoughts and emotions from me online, but it is surprisingly difficult. If they write one line, it is like they have broadcasted their inner emotions for all to see. But I notice others do not see it. Nor can textual analysis account for all the details and accuracy obtained."
Perhaps you could answer a question that's been on my mind.
When Maya Angelou wrote "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings" was she referring to the "four and twenty black birds, baked in a pie. And when the pie was opened the birds began to sing"? And if so was it also a musing on Schroedinger's Cat, they being baked and all.
When Maya Angelou wrote "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings" was she referring to the "four and twenty black birds, baked in a pie. And when the pie was opened the birds began to sing"? And if so was it also a musing on Schroedinger's Cat, they being baked and all.
I get the sense you are annoyed and or triggered. That's all I am getting, son.
Also I don't know you from Adam, thus there's no baseline template. Even interrogators need a baseline to work off from.
What you are thinking is that "Ymar is half baked". Isn't that right, son. Plus ONe Flew Over the Cuckoo Nest of Ymar's delusions, in not so many words of course.
Not annoyed or triggered. Bemused perhaps.
You may not know me but I certainly know you. Perhaps if you payed more attention to the other commenters where you post you might recognize some names.
Half baked? No, more like burned to a crisp. Your writing is reminiscent of a philosophy major in a college dorm fueled by some killer Thai Stick expounding on the writings of Allen Ginsberg. All in all? Tedious.
Perhaps if you payed more attention to the other commenters where you post you might recognize some names.
Should I pay attention to people lurking online that are bemused at me? Until they say something to me, they aren't on my radar.
No, more like burned to a crisp.
This oracle only gives one freebie reading, per person, per day. Everything else has to come with a donation or sacrifice ala tithing.
Your writing is reminiscent of a philosophy major in a college dorm fueled by some killer Thai Stick expounding on the writings of Allen Ginsberg. All in all? Tedious.
Is that what you chose to waste your time writing, son?
Not exactly something the sages and Sons of God are interested in, so I'll pass until it gets more interesting. If something is tedious here, I don't go out of my way to complain and whine about it, the way you mortals do. I just don't read it or if it is personally offensive and full of emotional triggers, I don't respond to it.
Me replying to you is already more "attention" than your butter bar burn deserves.
Not annoyed or triggered.
Someone who tells his ego he is not annoyed and triggered, but lectures someone online about who he should pay attention to and how his writing is tedious and reminiscent of a burnt crips.... gotcha son. If you have anything else to tell to the Sons of God, please call the Divine hotline, and not Ymar. I have other missions and tasks to do today.
That's beautiful, Roy.
I agree that part of the reason that building is so good is because the architect knew better than to try to compete with such natural beauty, and in deferring to it, succeeded wildly. The modern aesthetic (in the sense of clean and simple, which some ascribe to a Japanese influence in some sectors of modern architecture) turns out to work pretty darn well as a frame through which to view natural beauty.
Post a Comment