Abandoning religion

Summary

The transcript discusses the concept of 'darkside epistemology,' where lies necessitate further lies, drawing parallels to religious narratives that may conflict with scientific evidence. It argues against literalism in religious texts and highlights the challenges of the Enlightenment's attempt to discard religion. Instead, it suggests that the human need for mythology is deeply ingrained, as we are embodied consciousness. The conversation touches on the role of stories in shaping our understanding of the universe and the potential for science to create new narratives that resonate with our mythological heritage.

Takeaways

• 🚫 The speaker advocates for discarding religion and reconstructing human experience from scratch, as they believe it's better than trying to salvage anything from religion.
• 📜 The concept of 'darkside epistemology' is introduced, suggesting that lies necessitate more lies, creating a web of falsehoods that extend beyond specific facts to encompass entire belief systems.
• 🦎 The speaker uses the example of creationism versus evolutionary biology to illustrate how initial lies about the origins of life lead to further lies about the design of animals and what constitutes evidence.
• 📈 The speaker criticizes the 'retreat to commitment' that religion has made in the face of scientific challenges, arguing that it has led to a defensive stance and the development of bad epistemology to protect central religious lies.
• 🤔 The speaker acknowledges the problem of literalism in religious texts, where people take ancient scriptures literally and selectively apply their teachings without fully adhering to all aspects of the texts.
• 🌐 The Enlightenment's attempt to discard religion is seen as unsuccessful, with the speaker arguing that reason alone is a poor substitute for the human need for meaning and narrative.
• 🎭 The speaker argues that the heritage of religion, particularly its mythological aspects, is an integral part of human culture and consciousness that cannot be easily discarded or replaced.
• 🌟 The embodiment of humans as conscious beings is highlighted as a reason why mythologies and narratives persist, as they serve a deep-seated need for stories that explain our place in the universe.
• 📚 The speaker suggests that even scientific endeavors, such as writing papers on complex topics like magnetohydrodynamic Riemann solvers, have a narrative structure that can be influenced by the need for a compelling story.
• 🌌 The potential for science to create new 'true stories' about the universe is discussed, with the speaker emphasizing the importance of these stories being true, regardless of other benefits they may provide.
• 🔄 The speaker points out that many possible narratives for the universe have already been mapped out in mythologies, suggesting that even scientific cosmology may inadvertently retell these ancient stories.

Q & A

What is the 'fourth position' mentioned in the transcript?

The 'fourth position' refers to the idea of discarding religion and starting over to reconstruct the human experience without relying on religious teachings.

What is 'darkside epistemology' and how does it relate to the need for more lies?

Darkside epistemology is a concept suggesting that lies require other lies to maintain consistency. It implies that once a falsehood is introduced, additional lies are needed to support it, creating a web of deceit.

How does the concept of lying about one's actions at work illustrate the idea of darkside epistemology?

Lying about one's actions at work can lead to a chain of lies, such as lying about the presence of the boss, which then requires further lies to maintain the initial falsehood, exemplifying the concept of darkside epistemology.

What shift occurs when discussing religious teachings and the need for lies according to the transcript?

The shift is from lying about particular facts to lying about the rules of evidence and the considerations used to determine what constitutes good evidence, which reflects a deeper entanglement in falsehoods.

What is the 'retreat to commitment' mentioned in the transcript?

The 'retreat to commitment' is a defensive stance taken by religion against scientific advancements, where believers protect their core beliefs without necessarily engaging in open inquiry or accepting scientific evidence.

Why is literalism considered a problem according to the discussion?

Literalism is problematic because it involves taking ancient scriptures written under different conditions literally, leading to a rigid interpretation that may not align with contemporary understanding and can hinder progress.

What is the argument against discarding religious heritage and starting over?

The argument against discarding religious heritage is that it is an integral part of human culture and experience. It is believed that even if we attempt to start over, the deep-seated human need for mythology and narrative will re-emerge.

How does the concept of mythologies play a role in the discussion?

Mythologies are seen as a universal human heritage that reflects our embodied consciousness. They provide narratives that resonate with us on a deep level, and these narratives are likely to re-emerge in any new stories we construct about the universe, even when based on scientific understanding.

What does the speaker suggest about the role of stories in understanding the universe?

The speaker suggests that stories about the universe, including scientific narratives, serve an important function and should ideally be true. However, the way humans naturally tell and interpret stories may not always align with the core facts.

How does the transcript relate the idea of science and fun?

The transcript implies that science could benefit from incorporating more fun and engaging narratives, as the current scientific discourse may be too dry and lacking in the mythological elements that resonate with human consciousness.

What does the discussion about cosmology and myth suggest about the future of scientific storytelling?

The discussion suggests that future scientific storytelling, particularly in cosmology, will likely draw on the rich heritage of mythologies to construct narratives that are both scientifically accurate and emotionally resonant for humans.

Outlines

00:00

🧐 Darkside Epistemology and the Problem with Religion

The speaker introduces the concept of 'darkside epistemology,' which suggests that lies necessitate more lies. This idea is applied to religious narratives, where the speaker argues that once a foundational lie is established (e.g., creationism vs. evolutionary biology), it leads to a cascade of additional lies to support the initial one. The speaker criticizes the defensive stance religion has taken against science, leading to a 'retreat to commitment' and the development of flawed epistemology to protect these central lies. The discussion then shifts to the issue of literalism in religious texts and the selective adherence to certain aspects of these texts by followers, highlighting the complexity of dealing with religious heritage.

05:00

🌌 The Enduring Influence of Mythology in Religion and Science

The speaker discusses the universal and enduring nature of mythologies across cultures, referencing Joseph Campbell's 'The Hero with a Thousand Faces.' The argument is made that our embodied consciousness makes us naturally inclined towards mythological narratives, which are deeply ingrained in our understanding of the world. The speaker suggests that even in the realm of science, narratives and stories play a significant role, particularly when discussing grand theories like cosmology. The idea is that these scientific narratives may unconsciously draw from the mythological stories that have already been told, indicating that religion and mythology have an intrinsic and inescapable influence on our collective consciousness.

Keywords

💡Darkside Epistemology

The term 'Darkside Epistemology' refers to the concept that lies necessitate other lies to maintain the initial falsehood. In the context of the video, it is used to illustrate how once a false narrative is established, such as a religious belief that contradicts scientific evidence, additional lies must be told to support that initial untruth. This creates a web of deception that entangles more and more facts, making it harder to discern the truth.

💡Literalism

Literalism in the context of the video refers to the interpretation of religious texts or scriptures as being entirely factual and true, word for word. This approach often leads to conflicts with scientific understanding and can result in the rejection of scientific evidence that contradicts the literal reading of religious texts.

💡Retreat to Commitment

The phrase 'Retreat to Commitment' is used to describe a defensive stance taken by religion in response to scientific challenges. It refers to the process by which religious institutions and believers protect their central beliefs by developing systems of thought and epistemology that defend against the encroachment of scientific skepticism and rationalism.

💡Mythology

Mythology in this context refers to the collection of traditional stories, often involving supernatural beings or events, that explain the origins, history, and customs of a society. The speaker argues that mythologies are a deep-seated part of human culture and consciousness, and that they cannot be entirely discarded even when attempting to construct new narratives based on scientific understanding.

💡Embodied Consciousness

Embodied consciousness refers to the idea that our physical bodies and their experiences in the world shape our consciousness and understanding. In the video, this concept is used to argue that because humans are physical beings, the stories and mythologies we create are deeply connected to our embodied experiences and cannot be completely separated from our inherent nature.

💡Hero's Journey

The Hero's Journey is a common narrative pattern identified by Joseph Campbell in which a hero embarks on an adventure, faces challenges, and ultimately transforms or achieves enlightenment. In the video, this concept is used to illustrate the universal appeal of such stories and how they reflect our desire for meaning and purpose in life.

💡Enlightenment

The Enlightenment was a philosophical movement of the 17th and 18th centuries that emphasized reason, individualism, and the scientific method as the basis for understanding the world and shaping society. In the video, the speaker contrasts the Enlightenment's attempt to discard religion with the idea that religion and its associated narratives are deeply ingrained in human culture and cannot be easily replaced.

💡Cosmology

Cosmology is the study of the origin, evolution, and eventual fate of the universe. In the video, cosmology is discussed as a scientific endeavor that also has mythological overtones, as it attempts to explain the grand narrative of the universe's history and future.

💡Narrative

A narrative is a story or a sequence of events that form a coherent and connected account. In the context of the video, the speaker argues that even scientific theories and explanations become narratives when they are scaled up to encompass the largest questions about the universe, and that these narratives are often shaped by existing mythologies and human preferences for certain types of stories.

💡Epistemology

Epistemology is the branch of philosophy concerned with the nature, sources, and limits of knowledge. In the video, the term is used to discuss the systems of thought and methods by which people determine what is considered valid knowledge or truth, and how these systems can be corrupted or influenced by religious dogma.

💡Science

Science is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe. In the video, science is portrayed as a tool for understanding the world that can sometimes conflict with religious narratives, but also as a potential source for new mythologies and narratives that reflect a more accurate understanding of reality.

Highlights

The introduction of the 'fourth position' which suggests discarding religion and reconstructing the human experience from scratch.

The concept of 'darkside epistemology' where lies require additional lies to maintain consistency.

The example of how a simple lie about one's actions can lead to a cascade of further lies and deceptions.

The discussion on how creationism versus evolutionary biology can lead to a series of lies about the origins and design of animals.

The shift from lying about specific facts to lying about the rules of evidence and considerations for evaluating truth.

The critique of religion's defensive stance against science, leading to a 'retreat to commitment' and the development of bad epistemology.

The agreement on the problem of literalism in religious texts and the selective adherence to certain aspects of these texts.

The argument against discarding religious heritage and starting over, citing the Enlightenment's unsuccessful attempt.

The assertion that reason alone is a poor substitute for people in their everyday lives, leading to the rise of the Romantics.

The importance of heritage within religion and the difficulty of escaping it, as it is deeply ingrained in human consciousness.

The discussion on mythologies and their universality across cultures, as proposed by Joseph Campbell and the hero's journey.

The idea that human stories and mythologies are deeply connected to our embodied consciousness and will inevitably re-emerge.

The critique of science's lack of fun and the need for a more engaging narrative in scientific storytelling.

The assertion that scientific theories, even at the largest scale, become narratives that we choose to frame within the context of mythologies.

The example of cosmology as a mythological science, where many possibilities have already been mapped out in mythology.

The suggestion that the real answer to the universe's nature may not be on our current list of possibilities.

Transcripts

let me make some of the case here for

what I've called the fourth position

that we should just cast aside religion

and start over that whatever we

reconstruct of the human experience

we're probably better off doing it over

rather than trying to take anything from

religion um and and and if I were to

sort of start explaining that viewpoint

I would start with the concept of what I

call darkside epistemology and the

concept there is that lies require other

lies if you lie about what you were

doing at work yesterday you might have

to lie about whether or not the boss was

there you know you know you lie your

wife too but what about what you were

doing at work yesterday then you have to

lie about whether or not the boss is

there in case she thinks to ask the boss

then you have to lie about what your

boss was doing or similarly I hate to

bring up the debate the turtle debate

again but creationism versus

evolutionary biology first you lie about

where animals come from then you'd have

to lie about how well designed animals

are and then you have to start lying

about what constitutes evidence so now

we've taken the shift from lying about

particular facts and of course that you

just have to tell more and more life

because all these facts are entangled

but sorry I just heard a little strange

toner you still there

yeah I'm still here yeah okay so

miracles of cell phones America

wonderful miracles of cell phones yeah

so you have to lie about all these facts

now you also have to lie about the rules

of evidence and once you have to lie

about the rules of evidence you also

have to lie about the considerations

that you bring in to decide whether or

not something is a good rule of evidence

you have to lie about what thinking is

for you have to say well the point is to

generate warm fuzzy feelings of faith

and not to find the the truth story the

the map that reflects the territory back

in the old days when before religion

went on its defensive against science

you know you these people really believe

that their cosmology was correct

they were advocating their cosmology as

something that yet as the map that

reflected the territory this was

supposed to be the way things were but

once religion went on the defensive

against science it executed what I

believe William Bartley called

called the retreat to commitment I

believe because I believe and with that

defensiveness they had to protect sort

of the central lies what you've called

the results they have to protect those

things and they developed a whole system

of not just false assertions but also of

bad epistemology to defend I think

they're gonna be this is a place we're

going to agree I mean the problem but

we're gonna decide this I'll get to the

disagreement in a moment but first the

agreement is that you know essentially

that the great error is literalism is

that people take these scriptures which

were written you know thousands of years

ago under a wholly different conditions

and actually you know believe that every

word of it and also of course they're

picking and choosing to write they're

not selling their daughters into slavery

or you know carrying forward all the

percenter some some religions pick and

choose less than others exactly but you

know it's the literalism that is is the

problem but here's a but if what I will

disagree with as a strategy for dealing

with this is you know the idea that we

could throw out our heritage right our

heritage of that of which religion is

apart and start over again is very much

an Enlightenment idea right I mean this

was very much like what drove many of

the Enlightenment why should why not

slow off religion I mean science has no

trouble slowing things off you know it's

wrong you say oops you move on right

well two reasons okay two reasons one is

good luck good luck with that right

because that's what the Enlightenment

tried to do and it didn't work and it

didn't work for a variety of reasons one

which is that this ideal of

sure reason is a pretty poor substitute

for people in their lives okay that mean

that's what I would argue and that's

what I think that's why in some sense

here you got the romantics very quickly

after the Enlightenment and then they

had the other lead can it be done the

war continues we will bring pure reason

to the masses and the second reason is

is that there's a heritage within

religion you know with it that is part

of what we now the institutional

religions which there's no I feel

there's no way of getting past and that

and my argument for this is Luke

Skywalker right I mean you know

mythologies and this is one of the

reasons I spend a lot of time in the

book thinking about mythologies first

starting with Joseph Campbell and his

ideas of you know the hero with a

thousand faces but the commonality of

mythologies across cultures and then

trying to expand away from just his you

know sort of narrow interpretation of

mythology but the idea that that you

know we have this heritage of Mythology

that we just can't get away from we can

try to but it carries with us for very

deep reasons most of all because we're

embodied we are embodied consciousness

so if there's really elegance if it's

really that deep then well then it will

emerge again when it comes time to

entirely out of science construct our

new true stories because a very

important function of a story about how

the universe works is to actually be

true whatever else you get out of it you

know it's nice if it were true so but

but if you but if there are these these

ways that humans prefer to tell and

interpret to their stories regardless of

sort of as it were thee the core facts

and before you decide how you feel about

them then you know maybe Joseph temple

will look at the story that I would tell

about humanity's emergence in the in the

universe and say humanity is the hero of

the story and humanity is on a quest to

take over the universe and be crowned

ruler of you know the galaxies that it

has transformed into civilizations okay

well good for Joseph Campbell but where

does religion come into it well it's not

it's again I'm sorry

well here's the reason why is that story

that you're going to tell has already

been told what happens actually in

science what I argue in the book is that

you know when I write it

paper on magneto hydrodynamic riemann

solvers right there's not a whole lot of

Mythology in it it's it though it is a

narrative it's a narrative of you know

an attempt to fulfill a task the

difficulties the trying and I think that

because science is doing it wrong and

having too little fun but that's a whole

separate time well yeah no I kind of

agree I remember I had a professor one

time early on and I showed him my paper

and he said what's that I said that's a

joke sir and he's like we don't put

jokes in papers so I learned very very

quickly that yeah we don't have enough

fun in science but you know when we get

to the largest scale the largest

embodiment of our of our scientific

theorizing it always becomes a narrative

and very often it is we consciously or

unconsciously choose our narratives

choose to frame our narratives within

the context of the storehouse of

mythologies Marcelo gleiser who's a

cosmologists myth has talked about this

that really when you look at say

cosmology which is a very mythological

kind of science

um you see that actually already in

mythology's all the different

possibilities have been mapped out the

universe is a cycle right the universe

started from nothing out of a void you

know the universe is a is kaykai emerged

from chaos and so you know I gave you 30

years with nods that whatever the real

answer is it's not on your list at all

but leaving that aside well no but I

think actually what you're gonna find is

as mythology already has imagined many

of those and we are almost for to danger

on those

you