Theme: Religion

I understand that believers are non rational, and un-persuadable, and over invested in a network of falsehoods, and so believers will not change except to follow an even larger and safer herd. So my objective is to use arguments to search for people in the herd who know that the mythos is false, but want a new herd to join. So I state my arguments and avoid engaging in abrahamic sophisms, and then insult those who make them to deprive them of their attempt to gain confidence and signals from their denials. My endgame is the completion of the transformation of Germanicized christianity to natural law and reciprocity, completely laundered of sophism(abrahamism), superstition, mysticism, magic, falsehoods, and lies. Truth is enough. COMMENTS Daniel Roland Anderson This just turned a light on for me. Germanized Christianity (I’m thinking of Kant trying to put logical legs under “do unto others as you’d have them do unto you” with the categorical imperative) really got pretty close to something. Reciprocity. Natural Law. I see the idea of reciprocity in Kant’s work—to the extent I can understand it. (The importance Kant places on truth telling, no matter the immediate consequence, looks very familiar.) How about Natural Law? Where do you see this principle most strongly in previous work? Curt Doolittle The common (Natural) law. Daniel Roland Anderson If I had to pick, this is my favorite thing. In law school, property class, I loved the series of cases on possession of property starting with Pierson vs. Post and the fox. Constitutionalists got in my head (my dad brought me up on the constitution) and I second guessed my love for the process of discovering the general law by looking at specific case after case and tweaking and modifying the ruling in connection with previous cases. It feels like home. It was my mother who helped me see that it isn’t judicial discretion that is bad. It’s just that you need to give discretion to the right sort of judge. We haven’t managed that.

I understand that believers are non rational, and un-persuadable, and over invested in a network of falsehoods, and so believers will not change except to follow an even larger and safer herd. So my objective is to use arguments to search for people in the herd who know that the mythos is false, but want a new herd to join. So I state my arguments and avoid engaging in abrahamic sophisms, and then insult those who make them to deprive them of their attempt to gain confidence and signals from their denials. My endgame is the completion of the transformation of Germanicized christianity to natural law and reciprocity, completely laundered of sophism(abrahamism), superstition, mysticism, magic, falsehoods, and lies. Truth is enough. COMMENTS Daniel Roland Anderson This just turned a light on for me. Germanized Christianity (I’m thinking of Kant trying to put logical legs under “do unto others as you’d have them do unto you” with the categorical imperative) really got pretty close to something. Reciprocity. Natural Law. I see the idea of reciprocity in Kant’s work—to the extent I can understand it. (The importance Kant places on truth telling, no matter the immediate consequence, looks very familiar.) How about Natural Law? Where do you see this principle most strongly in previous work? Curt Doolittle The common (Natural) law. Daniel Roland Anderson If I had to pick, this is my favorite thing. In law school, property class, I loved the series of cases on possession of property starting with Pierson vs. Post and the fox. Constitutionalists got in my head (my dad brought me up on the constitution) and I second guessed my love for the process of discovering the general law by looking at specific case after case and tweaking and modifying the ruling in connection with previous cases. It feels like home. It was my mother who helped me see that it isn’t judicial discretion that is bad. It’s just that you need to give discretion to the right sort of judge. We haven’t managed that.