“In effect, Communists rejected the metaphysics of religion but kept the epistemology of faith. All the answers are already known and handed down from some existing authority, and it is a sin to doubt. It’s just that instead of believing all important truths were announced by Bronze Age prophets, the Communists held that they were announced at the last Party Congress.”
My favorite part of a great article! Keep it up, Rob!
> It’s just that instead of believing all important truths were announced by Bronze Age prophets, the Communists held that they were announced at the last Party Congress.
This is poetry (rhyme and all). It makes the heart sing :)
Excellent! The sense of smug superiority (or is it insecurity?) that emanates from many "people of faith" regarding how spiritually bereft atheists must be, is irritating and ultimately somewhat depressing. I don't care if others choose to believe there's some invisible sky creature(s) out there manipulating or judging every act on earth, but I do take offense when they spew words to the effect, "All the problems of the world are caused by atheists!" Hello??? Was there not an army, not so long ago, that savaged its way across Europe wearing belt buckles emblazoned with "Gott Mit Uns"? And are there not a thousand or a million other examples of "God's will" being used as an excuse for the most brutal acts of history? I won't go so far as to blame all the problems of the world on theists, but I will assert that belief in God(s) in and of itself confers no virtue.
"But what the Marxists actually offered was not an alternative to religious dogmatism—just a competitor."
Hard to pick a favorite line from this column but this may be it.
(Banned)Apr 4·edited Apr 4Liked by Robert Tracinski
Hmmm. I always dig me some Robert Tracinski. An Atheist who read The Bible and came away with the remarkable insight that the faithful bought by crook line and sinker a court of patriarchs, I mean the patriarchy were selling, much like the not so open minded, intolerant Claudine Gays defenders are die hard true believers we live in a racist, sexist domineering patriarchy where all conservatives seik hail to The Don….i kid….i kid Bob
It is just I cannot help but think of my old man, barely survivor of the god forsaken Ardennes Forest, who literally did epitomize the belief their are no atheists in a foxhole, whose own pursuit of happiness was fulfilled by his being a most devout Roman Catholic , who if there is any Divine Justice, is art in heaven….and one little German turd is rotting in Hell. But, to Witt, as there is so much I could and would say about your be lie fs Robert, as this here child of the 80s born, baptized and brainwashed washed Roman Catholic from a very small midwestern town…the Spinoza in me shocked and deeply saddened my 70’s something old man when I came home from college and told him I was….an agnostic….But to deliberately shit on your point Robert, my old man, like all his friends and fellow survivors who all went to one church or another on Sunday’s, were not only the most tolerant and loving of ones neighbors, but would give the shirts off their backs because they no doubt feared Jesus, but also lived the parable of the Good Samaritan as if it were based on a true story..,.I cannot as I do not believe most of your true believer readers in The Torah writers just being a bunch of patriarchal 5 century BC. Joel Olsteen meets the Ayatollah hucksters would do the same…as I would like to believe you would still pick up a hitchhiker because the pursuit of happiness is not all what life is about and good for…so pave this in your head….it was not just those that agreed with you centuries ago that paved the way for you Robert yo be lucky enough to be born in the greatest country on God’s green earth, not to mention tolerant. This here Roman [comma] Catholic has Gotta run on. Peace through mental firepower
>>Historically, it may seem difficult to root liberalism in atheism...
This statement is dumbfounding. Liberalism begins with history's greatest atheist: Spinoza. Spinoza's Theological-Political Treatise (TTP, 1670) not only lays out and defends nearly every fundamental liberal idea, but founds scientific Bible study and proves the Bible is a terribly flawed and human authored. Spinoza deeply influenced all the liberal giants who came after him. Anyone who actually reads the TTP will marvel it was written 350 years ago and not last week.
> All authoritarian systems are built on the idea that there is some higher purpose that takes precedence over your own life and goals, justifying the supervening coercion of church and state.
I think my only point of disagreement (and I'm not even sure I'd go so far as to call it that) is this: authoritarian systems are built on the idea that a higher purpose takes precedence over *someone's* life and goals. To find out whose, you have to leave the realm of the abstract and look at specific authoritarian systems. This is the problem with "Nietzschean" (and to some extent Randian) philosophies - they're not systems for many coequal individuals to coexist within, but metasystems in which competing authoritarianisms (each centered on some specific individual) fight for dominance. This is why Elon Musk, for instance, feels no hypocrisy when he suppresses criticism of himself, even while declaring his absolute commitment to "free speech". A "free speech" society, for him, is exactly a society in which he speaks without consequence, because he stands at the peak of (a) society, and therefore his good is identical to (that) society's good.
I find it incredible that you can write that Islam (Muslims) is compatible with political liberalism. You have been sold a bill of goods by Hassan Abbas and Zahra Hassan. There is nothing in the Koran or the Hadiths that speak of liberalism, let alone political liberalism.
“As Voltaire observed (more or less, by way of a somewhat free translation), when we believe absurdities, we will commit atrocities. Most of the cruelties and terror that men have inflicted upon one another have been in the service of dogmas and fanaticism. Carefully cultivated delusions, believed in blindly, are what enable men to suppress their awareness of the fellow humanity of their victims.”
We see this fanaticism with regard to Wokeism, lockdowns, etc. (Since he commented above, I’ll mention that the “tolerant” Woke toady Aaron Ross Powell blocked me on Substack simply because I defended free speech with reference to articles by Greg Lukianoff). But all these folks claim to be using reason and logic. Many are just conformunists, of course, but like Objectivists, the main error is that they are justificationists who believe that truth can be established via inductive methods. Hume explained this error and, more recently, Popper showed that we never get beyond conjectures and refutations—and even apparent refutations remain unjustified. Justificationism is the door to dogmatism and a means to end debate. Armed with “logic and reason”, Wokels behave like fanatical Marxist-Leninists in terms of their zeal to cancel others and avoid debate.
My experience as atheist and later more as secular humanist is that it is easier to accept the freedom of religion and that humans choose different religions. Because you create your own liberal mindset and rational thinking, including by interpreting your social world and environment that humans can be religious because we are emotional and irrational in our nature. God did not create the humans - it is the humans who created God as a social construct to belive in. And as Karl Popper argued, by accepting scientific truts as something temporary until there is new knowledge, it is easier to reject dogma and prejudices.
I have tons of criticisms and disagreements with the book, but I think the authors' claim in The Dawn of Humanity that the idea of liberty in the modern sense was, to some degree closer to entirely than a little, imported from indigenous north Americans deserves a meaningful place in any discussion of the origins of liberal thought.
“The faithless are the more reliable liberals”. Sure, but that’s the problem with modern liberals. They have all the passion of the religious zealot, but very little to moor it to. Instead of grounding their worldview in a belief in an almighty - something vastly more powerful than themselves, which has bestowed the gifts and mysteries of human existence - they are adrift in the cosmos, latching on to the latest pseudo-intellectual fad, and pursuing that with the zeal of the inquisitor, insisting that baseline realities of life are fictions to be rejected, and those who calmly observe or adhere to such realities are to be driven from society if not burned at the stake. Atheism is the absolute pinnacle (or nadir) of human arrogance, imbued as it is with the “faith” that the non-believer is so clever that they are able to overcome basic aspects of life with tweaks in language and forced behavioral modifications (to counter those silly religious superstitions like the differences between man and woman), and typically gobs of other people’s money to reach the state of non-judgmental, non-religious nirvana where equality is enforced through the reduction of all to penury and subjugation, except of course for them, who deserve to
Accumulate wealth and exercise dominion over the lives of others because they are the
Enlightened. The rest get the lowest common denominator, which is enforced through the state’s monopoly on power and bureaucratic dictat. It’s all such a heap of shit, yet pursued so earnestly and confidently by faithless
Liberals, that it scares the hell out of me. It’s not that they don’t have faith, it’s just faith in their own enlightenment and superiority that drives them. They start at zero then move left, always into negative numbers. Woe be unto you who are guided by faith, as much as it may fortify you, because the left is out to make it a punishable offense. And in the process, drive this whole experiment in democratic self-governance directly into the ditch. They’re well on the way to fucking up the whole enchilada. Look around you. What is happening where they are in charge? Self-imposed, purposeful decline, laden with arrogance and condescension. Garbage in, garbage out.
Having recently taken a street-level tour of Hong Kong, one thing that struck me strongly was how here-and-now focused their ancient religion is. From the point of view of the worshipper, one buys incense and prays to the god to sends the smoke and prayer upwards which provides something the god requires/needs/likes. In return, the god provides help in the area they have oversight of; be it luck at the gambling tables, higher sales at the shop, or a better score on a test.
The interesting thing to me is how practical for the life of the worshipper this all is. They pray for stuff they need/want right now - this week - here on earth. When did religions lose this focus on life? When did it all become pain and suffering on our way to a "better place"? Arguably the ancient Chinese had just as much of the starvation/disease/slavery/etc etc as anyone else living in the past, what happened to make generations of people numbered in the multi-millions give up on this world?
As the guy who contributed the Buddhism entry to this series, I feel I should note that Buddhists *are* atheists.
“In effect, Communists rejected the metaphysics of religion but kept the epistemology of faith. All the answers are already known and handed down from some existing authority, and it is a sin to doubt. It’s just that instead of believing all important truths were announced by Bronze Age prophets, the Communists held that they were announced at the last Party Congress.”
My favorite part of a great article! Keep it up, Rob!
> It’s just that instead of believing all important truths were announced by Bronze Age prophets, the Communists held that they were announced at the last Party Congress.
This is poetry (rhyme and all). It makes the heart sing :)
Excellent! The sense of smug superiority (or is it insecurity?) that emanates from many "people of faith" regarding how spiritually bereft atheists must be, is irritating and ultimately somewhat depressing. I don't care if others choose to believe there's some invisible sky creature(s) out there manipulating or judging every act on earth, but I do take offense when they spew words to the effect, "All the problems of the world are caused by atheists!" Hello??? Was there not an army, not so long ago, that savaged its way across Europe wearing belt buckles emblazoned with "Gott Mit Uns"? And are there not a thousand or a million other examples of "God's will" being used as an excuse for the most brutal acts of history? I won't go so far as to blame all the problems of the world on theists, but I will assert that belief in God(s) in and of itself confers no virtue.
"But what the Marxists actually offered was not an alternative to religious dogmatism—just a competitor."
Hard to pick a favorite line from this column but this may be it.
One of my favorite reads from you so far.
lol, the Church of England… the religion you have when you aren’t having a religion.
Hmmm. I always dig me some Robert Tracinski. An Atheist who read The Bible and came away with the remarkable insight that the faithful bought by crook line and sinker a court of patriarchs, I mean the patriarchy were selling, much like the not so open minded, intolerant Claudine Gays defenders are die hard true believers we live in a racist, sexist domineering patriarchy where all conservatives seik hail to The Don….i kid….i kid Bob
It is just I cannot help but think of my old man, barely survivor of the god forsaken Ardennes Forest, who literally did epitomize the belief their are no atheists in a foxhole, whose own pursuit of happiness was fulfilled by his being a most devout Roman Catholic , who if there is any Divine Justice, is art in heaven….and one little German turd is rotting in Hell. But, to Witt, as there is so much I could and would say about your be lie fs Robert, as this here child of the 80s born, baptized and brainwashed washed Roman Catholic from a very small midwestern town…the Spinoza in me shocked and deeply saddened my 70’s something old man when I came home from college and told him I was….an agnostic….But to deliberately shit on your point Robert, my old man, like all his friends and fellow survivors who all went to one church or another on Sunday’s, were not only the most tolerant and loving of ones neighbors, but would give the shirts off their backs because they no doubt feared Jesus, but also lived the parable of the Good Samaritan as if it were based on a true story..,.I cannot as I do not believe most of your true believer readers in The Torah writers just being a bunch of patriarchal 5 century BC. Joel Olsteen meets the Ayatollah hucksters would do the same…as I would like to believe you would still pick up a hitchhiker because the pursuit of happiness is not all what life is about and good for…so pave this in your head….it was not just those that agreed with you centuries ago that paved the way for you Robert yo be lucky enough to be born in the greatest country on God’s green earth, not to mention tolerant. This here Roman [comma] Catholic has Gotta run on. Peace through mental firepower
> who wanted to bite the head off a live bat
I wouldn't knock this -- with the right bat at the right time... may have prevented a global pandemic.
>>Historically, it may seem difficult to root liberalism in atheism...
This statement is dumbfounding. Liberalism begins with history's greatest atheist: Spinoza. Spinoza's Theological-Political Treatise (TTP, 1670) not only lays out and defends nearly every fundamental liberal idea, but founds scientific Bible study and proves the Bible is a terribly flawed and human authored. Spinoza deeply influenced all the liberal giants who came after him. Anyone who actually reads the TTP will marvel it was written 350 years ago and not last week.
> All authoritarian systems are built on the idea that there is some higher purpose that takes precedence over your own life and goals, justifying the supervening coercion of church and state.
I think my only point of disagreement (and I'm not even sure I'd go so far as to call it that) is this: authoritarian systems are built on the idea that a higher purpose takes precedence over *someone's* life and goals. To find out whose, you have to leave the realm of the abstract and look at specific authoritarian systems. This is the problem with "Nietzschean" (and to some extent Randian) philosophies - they're not systems for many coequal individuals to coexist within, but metasystems in which competing authoritarianisms (each centered on some specific individual) fight for dominance. This is why Elon Musk, for instance, feels no hypocrisy when he suppresses criticism of himself, even while declaring his absolute commitment to "free speech". A "free speech" society, for him, is exactly a society in which he speaks without consequence, because he stands at the peak of (a) society, and therefore his good is identical to (that) society's good.
I find it incredible that you can write that Islam (Muslims) is compatible with political liberalism. You have been sold a bill of goods by Hassan Abbas and Zahra Hassan. There is nothing in the Koran or the Hadiths that speak of liberalism, let alone political liberalism.
“As Voltaire observed (more or less, by way of a somewhat free translation), when we believe absurdities, we will commit atrocities. Most of the cruelties and terror that men have inflicted upon one another have been in the service of dogmas and fanaticism. Carefully cultivated delusions, believed in blindly, are what enable men to suppress their awareness of the fellow humanity of their victims.”
We see this fanaticism with regard to Wokeism, lockdowns, etc. (Since he commented above, I’ll mention that the “tolerant” Woke toady Aaron Ross Powell blocked me on Substack simply because I defended free speech with reference to articles by Greg Lukianoff). But all these folks claim to be using reason and logic. Many are just conformunists, of course, but like Objectivists, the main error is that they are justificationists who believe that truth can be established via inductive methods. Hume explained this error and, more recently, Popper showed that we never get beyond conjectures and refutations—and even apparent refutations remain unjustified. Justificationism is the door to dogmatism and a means to end debate. Armed with “logic and reason”, Wokels behave like fanatical Marxist-Leninists in terms of their zeal to cancel others and avoid debate.
My experience as atheist and later more as secular humanist is that it is easier to accept the freedom of religion and that humans choose different religions. Because you create your own liberal mindset and rational thinking, including by interpreting your social world and environment that humans can be religious because we are emotional and irrational in our nature. God did not create the humans - it is the humans who created God as a social construct to belive in. And as Karl Popper argued, by accepting scientific truts as something temporary until there is new knowledge, it is easier to reject dogma and prejudices.
I have tons of criticisms and disagreements with the book, but I think the authors' claim in The Dawn of Humanity that the idea of liberty in the modern sense was, to some degree closer to entirely than a little, imported from indigenous north Americans deserves a meaningful place in any discussion of the origins of liberal thought.
“The faithless are the more reliable liberals”. Sure, but that’s the problem with modern liberals. They have all the passion of the religious zealot, but very little to moor it to. Instead of grounding their worldview in a belief in an almighty - something vastly more powerful than themselves, which has bestowed the gifts and mysteries of human existence - they are adrift in the cosmos, latching on to the latest pseudo-intellectual fad, and pursuing that with the zeal of the inquisitor, insisting that baseline realities of life are fictions to be rejected, and those who calmly observe or adhere to such realities are to be driven from society if not burned at the stake. Atheism is the absolute pinnacle (or nadir) of human arrogance, imbued as it is with the “faith” that the non-believer is so clever that they are able to overcome basic aspects of life with tweaks in language and forced behavioral modifications (to counter those silly religious superstitions like the differences between man and woman), and typically gobs of other people’s money to reach the state of non-judgmental, non-religious nirvana where equality is enforced through the reduction of all to penury and subjugation, except of course for them, who deserve to
Accumulate wealth and exercise dominion over the lives of others because they are the
Enlightened. The rest get the lowest common denominator, which is enforced through the state’s monopoly on power and bureaucratic dictat. It’s all such a heap of shit, yet pursued so earnestly and confidently by faithless
Liberals, that it scares the hell out of me. It’s not that they don’t have faith, it’s just faith in their own enlightenment and superiority that drives them. They start at zero then move left, always into negative numbers. Woe be unto you who are guided by faith, as much as it may fortify you, because the left is out to make it a punishable offense. And in the process, drive this whole experiment in democratic self-governance directly into the ditch. They’re well on the way to fucking up the whole enchilada. Look around you. What is happening where they are in charge? Self-imposed, purposeful decline, laden with arrogance and condescension. Garbage in, garbage out.
Having recently taken a street-level tour of Hong Kong, one thing that struck me strongly was how here-and-now focused their ancient religion is. From the point of view of the worshipper, one buys incense and prays to the god to sends the smoke and prayer upwards which provides something the god requires/needs/likes. In return, the god provides help in the area they have oversight of; be it luck at the gambling tables, higher sales at the shop, or a better score on a test.
The interesting thing to me is how practical for the life of the worshipper this all is. They pray for stuff they need/want right now - this week - here on earth. When did religions lose this focus on life? When did it all become pain and suffering on our way to a "better place"? Arguably the ancient Chinese had just as much of the starvation/disease/slavery/etc etc as anyone else living in the past, what happened to make generations of people numbered in the multi-millions give up on this world?