Read on Twitter
Currently thinking about
- God as a mechanism to integrate the unknown unknown into real-world models.
- God as an acknowledgement of complexity
- God as a socio-cultural binding principle
- God as the finger pointing to the moon
- God as a mechanism to integrate the unknown unknown into real-world models.
- God as an acknowledgement of complexity
- God as a socio-cultural binding principle
- God as the finger pointing to the moon
Religion is a useful protocol running on the hive-mind simulation.
Fueled by myth, metaphor, and narrative, God is a mechanism that has helped humans acknowledge and fruitfully integrate the unknown-unknown into the real world.
Fueled by myth, metaphor, and narrative, God is a mechanism that has helped humans acknowledge and fruitfully integrate the unknown-unknown into the real world.
When you look into it, polytheistic religions and belief systems are fundamentally practical, when contrasted with the purely transcendent and all-encompassing nature of monotheistic gods.
Rituals produce concrete, earthly results along with spiritual ones.
Rituals produce concrete, earthly results along with spiritual ones.
A straightforward example would be divination rituals.
When hunting caribou, Naskapi foragers in Canada had to decide where to hunt. They believed that the shoulder bones of caribou pointed the way to success.
When hunting caribou, Naskapi foragers in Canada had to decide where to hunt. They believed that the shoulder bones of caribou pointed the way to success.
The ritual involved heating caribou shoulder blades over hot coals in a way that caused patterns of cracks and burnt spots to form. The Naskapi hunters then read this patterning as a kind of map, after holding it in a pre-specified orientation dictated by custom.
Now from a superficial practical viewpoint, one might say that there's no causal link between these patterns and the task at hand.
The divination was essentially random, as the burning of bones had little-to-nothing to do with the location of physical hunting spots.
The divination was essentially random, as the burning of bones had little-to-nothing to do with the location of physical hunting spots.
But let's see what purpose this ritual *actually* served, even though a rational onlooker would have deemed it bizarre and wholly superstitious.
Let's say the Naskapi hunters chose the "common-sense" approach and simply went where their friends last spotted caribou.
Let's say the Naskapi hunters chose the "common-sense" approach and simply went where their friends last spotted caribou.
When analyzed and reasoned from an iterated game-theoretic perspective, we can quickly see why following such an approach would lead to decreasing success over time. The caribou don't want to be where the hunters are.
While the hunters tried to benefit by going to previously successful locations, caribou would benefit by avoiding locations where they've previously spotted humans. In game-theoretic terms, hunters are matchers while the caribou are mismatchers.
Thus, the best hunting strategy over a period of time would have been the one that involved an element of randomization.
So we see that besides its psycho-spiritual effects on hunter morale, the divination ritual indirectly served as a randomization algorithm.
So we see that besides its psycho-spiritual effects on hunter morale, the divination ritual indirectly served as a randomization algorithm.
Another example would be the elaborate, multistep, multiday ritual involved in preparation of Manioc by the indigenous Tukano tribe of the Amazon.
if it weren't this time-consuming ritual, the tribe would've soon developed symptoms of chronic cyanide poisoning.
if it weren't this time-consuming ritual, the tribe would've soon developed symptoms of chronic cyanide poisoning.
Over the years, the seemingly spiritual ritual has helped the tribe consume the herb without falling prey to its harmful side-effects.
But if you'd ask them why they performed it, they'd probably tell you that the divine creative spirit invented it and gave it to them.
But if you'd ask them why they performed it, they'd probably tell you that the divine creative spirit invented it and gave it to them.
Consider what might have happened if a "rational" person had tried to critically examine the procedure step-by-step and falsely concluded that the ritual was only to remove the bitter taste of the manioc.
They would have then tried to eliminate seemingly needless steps and come up with more "efficient" processes that got rid of the bitterness but left the issue of the cyanide unchecked.
For want of efficiency and lack of complex knowledge, they'd die from cyanide poisoning.
For want of efficiency and lack of complex knowledge, they'd die from cyanide poisoning.
The important thing to understand with the complex knowledge encoded in tradition that's passed down generations is this:
It's a black-box technology, tested by time.
The practitioners don't know why it works; they only care that it works.
It's a black-box technology, tested by time.
The practitioners don't know why it works; they only care that it works.
The ritual isn't derived through epistemic and rational understanding of chemistry and biology, but through raw trial and error, fit for a certain environment.
Also, since the exact functioning of the complex ritual is unknown, exactitude is prized over understanding.
Also, since the exact functioning of the complex ritual is unknown, exactitude is prized over understanding.
Understanding the mechanism behind the ritual doesn't matter as long as it is followed exactly as specified, lest you "offend the gods."
(Or at least that's what they say. But the real issue is needlessly intervening in complex systems.)
(Or at least that's what they say. But the real issue is needlessly intervening in complex systems.)
This exactitude is why we've come to see rituals as more performatory than functional. When the precise reasoning behind each step isn't known, the process looks more art than science, more superstitious than epistemic.
The goal of these rituals was always getting practical results:
In ancient Greece, gods were tied to specific problems, places, jobs, and families. If you didn't live in that place or belong to that family or profession, you didn't need to develop a relationship with that god.
In ancient Greece, gods were tied to specific problems, places, jobs, and families. If you didn't live in that place or belong to that family or profession, you didn't need to develop a relationship with that god.
Understanding the nature and working of these gods didn't matter — what mattered was following their rituals and keeping them happy.
Even when we see Hinduism, a fundamentally polytheistic religion, the emphasis has always been on orthopraxy, i.e. practiced belief vs. orthodoxy, which is stated or proclaimed belief.
A ritual is much more than a mere superstition-led performance; it is an enactment of practical knowledge.
However, its practical efficacy encapsulated in and shrouded by a magical pill we've found easiest to swallow and pass on with extreme fidelity:
Stories.
However, its practical efficacy encapsulated in and shrouded by a magical pill we've found easiest to swallow and pass on with extreme fidelity:
Stories.
Just as cooking helped us digest food in the physical world, stories, and mythology may have helped us digest complex facts, processes, and modes of behavior in the psychological world. https://twitter.com/SteveStuWill/status/1155933719368093696?s=20
And it perhaps makes sense in the light of evolution.
Evolution is a compression algorithm that trades description for time. This is evident if you see the ultra-compressed nature of DNA, which makes it easy to replicate and reproduce while being extremely abstract.
Evolution is a compression algorithm that trades description for time. This is evident if you see the ultra-compressed nature of DNA, which makes it easy to replicate and reproduce while being extremely abstract.
It is the way in which a set of DNA interacts with its environment over time that results in its unfolding.
Same is the case with precise rituals that are passed on using simple stories, which are the simplest to remember and most efficient memetic devices possible.
Same is the case with precise rituals that are passed on using simple stories, which are the simplest to remember and most efficient memetic devices possible.
Reminds me of this excerpt from The Hero With a Thousand Faces
God solves a need for coherence and stability in chaos, an acknowledgement of the inherent uncertainty and complexity of life.
And religious people indirectly address that uncertainty in the form of a transcendent entity that interacts and intervenes in our real world affairs.
And religious people indirectly address that uncertainty in the form of a transcendent entity that interacts and intervenes in our real world affairs.
Whether there actually exists a man in the sky doesn't matter.
What matters is that the belief makes you account for the unpredictable nature of the world and gives you a framework of meaning when things do not go according to plan.
What matters is that the belief makes you account for the unpredictable nature of the world and gives you a framework of meaning when things do not go according to plan.
From a meaning-making perspective, purely rational frameworks seldom give us space to play around like a stories do. https://twitter.com/ghuubear/status/1272553939129585666
Also, a fact is dry and listless. Once you solely abide by Darwin's theory of evolution, life starts feeling like the hunger games.
There is nothing transcendental or spiritual about scientific fact.
A rational atheist either finds other religions to follow, or drowns in nihilism. https://twitter.com/ghuubear/status/1286385231499423744?s=20
A rational atheist either finds other religions to follow, or drowns in nihilism. https://twitter.com/ghuubear/status/1286385231499423744?s=20
We are trained to think that behaviors and actions must have explicable and articulable reasons; that we must have a good reason underlying everything.
But we don't have explicit causal models and clear reasons underlying *most* of what we do, and when asked, we make them up.
But we don't have explicit causal models and clear reasons underlying *most* of what we do, and when asked, we make them up.
Our success as a species is more a product of trial and error, more than we'd like to admit.
When removed from our supporting cultural and societal framework and the knowledge encoded therein, we fail quickly.
When removed from our supporting cultural and societal framework and the knowledge encoded therein, we fail quickly.
European explorers die in deserts and jungles, even though thousands of hunter-gatherer species have been able to survive in the same environments.
They paid for their success in human lives and time, of course.
They paid for their success in human lives and time, of course.
The point is, rational problem solving and analysis isn't everything.
A lot of luck and time is involved.
A lot of loss is involved.
Loss that would feel unbearable in the absence of meaning-making and generative frameworks like religion and spirituality.
A lot of luck and time is involved.
A lot of loss is involved.
Loss that would feel unbearable in the absence of meaning-making and generative frameworks like religion and spirituality.
Earlier I'd written about how tradition introduces useful friction in society and keeps the system in equilibrium by stifling drastic changes. https://twitter.com/ghuubear/status/1276923758041640960?s=20
While the viscosity added by tradition is certainly useful and the feedback must be damped lest the complex system oscillates and ripples its way out of equilibrium, I think there might also be a complementary aspect to religion and believing in divinity, specifically.
There is a paradoxical element to religion, where on the one hand, it tries to bind us with its laws, and on the other, frees us to play on the edge of chaos by supplying us with heroic myths and stories.
Religion may be an attenuating knob on both our best and worst impulses.
Religion may be an attenuating knob on both our best and worst impulses.
Following the middle path, complex adaptive systems learn and be creative "only when they operate at the edge of system disintegration. That place at the edge of disintegration is a kind of phase transition between a stable zone of operation and an unstable or disordered regime."
"To be effective, an organization must possess attributes that are simultaneously contradictory, even mutually exclusive. Thus organizations can have attributes that are contradictory and are paradoxical."
If society is an organization, religion is its management framework.
And it is designed by evolution, and thus optimized for transmission, not understanding.
It is transmitted precisely because it is useful and helps its propagators survive and propagate themselves.
And it is designed by evolution, and thus optimized for transmission, not understanding.
It is transmitted precisely because it is useful and helps its propagators survive and propagate themselves.
Might be an overly generous view, but I think there's a hidden noble element to the phenomenon where if a catastrophe occurs, humans blame themselves, but when they survive the catastrophe, they choose to thank God instead. https://twitter.com/GabbbarSingh/status/1244871344354807809?s=20
There is an acceptance of responsibility, and a bearing of the cross when you choose to blame yourself when things go wrong.
And an acknowledgement of the role of luck when things go right.
And an acknowledgement of the role of luck when things go right.
In any case, religion ensures that you maintain your humility in front of uncertainty.
The unknown lies at the heart of religion. And our constant rendezvous with the unknown throughout our treacherous past has kept this framework alive, and for good reason.
The unknown lies at the heart of religion. And our constant rendezvous with the unknown throughout our treacherous past has kept this framework alive, and for good reason.
In epistemic terms, God is a script that helps us realize the fundamental uncertainty of the world and religion is a framework to deal with our resulting insecurity.
In eschatological terms, the same God is a source of certainty and security needed for risk-taking and progress.
In eschatological terms, the same God is a source of certainty and security needed for risk-taking and progress.
So the next time your father rejects Darwin's Theory of Evolution, consider all the factors he's not being able to articulate that may underlie his rejection.
1. The absolute bankruptcy of rationality when it comes to the transcendental aspect of our psyche
Rationality is a powerful tool but when over-applied and used excessively, it makes us prone to massive failure due to overconfidence and the illusion of wisdom.
Rationality is a powerful tool but when over-applied and used excessively, it makes us prone to massive failure due to overconfidence and the illusion of wisdom.
"To lack reason is to be inhuman. To rely on it solely is to be disembodied." ~ @simonsarris
2. Profit maximization vs. Risk minimization
Once you see that your father is managing social risk rather than go slay the dragon for success, you'll understand his point of view better.
Once you see that your father is managing social risk rather than go slay the dragon for success, you'll understand his point of view better.
To give you a stable life, he himself has wobbled on the edge of disaster through most of his youth.
His beliefs and appetite for risk, therefore, are in line with his model and understanding of the risks he's faced. https://twitter.com/wrathofgnon/status/983251976635875328?s=20
His beliefs and appetite for risk, therefore, are in line with his model and understanding of the risks he's faced. https://twitter.com/wrathofgnon/status/983251976635875328?s=20
This article gives a good set of questions to ask whenever you feel like meddling with existing beliefs and traditions and convincing people to get rid of them. https://florentcrivello.com/index.php/2019/09/04/the-efficiency-destroying-magic-of-tidying-up/
More specifically, this bit:
3. Memeplexes
This is the domain where "Dharma becomes Dogma."
This is the domain where "Dharma becomes Dogma."
I especially loved this bit from Daniel Schmachtenberger:
"In religious ideas, you'll have some kind of central meme but then you'll also have protector memes that emerge with it. Believing them protects against the kind of cognitive processes that could have...
"In religious ideas, you'll have some kind of central meme but then you'll also have protector memes that emerge with it. Believing them protects against the kind of cognitive processes that could have...
...someone stop believing the primary meme, because if the primary intent is to last. So the question isn't just what makes a meme propagate, but also what makes it endure and resist change."
You need to figure out the exact mechanisms the religious memeplex is using to justify its resistance to change. And even then, it's better to just leave it alone. https://twitter.com/ghuubear/status/1288393039870746625?s=20
Morover, it's better to take that risk yourself than making others take it.
What's even more dangerous is to expose entire systems to it. https://twitter.com/ghuubear/status/1288396257593982977?s=20
What's even more dangerous is to expose entire systems to it. https://twitter.com/ghuubear/status/1288396257593982977?s=20
So the next time your religious folks talk about God and reject Darwin's theory of evolution, understand that God is the finger pointing to the moon.
And we all know what it means:
Look at the moon, not at the finger.
And we all know what it means:
Look at the moon, not at the finger.
