*

+
] wwwSite > SamHarris.org Reader Forum Index ->  #7
] Forum > Politics, Religion and Science > Faith (General Issues)
] Thread title > Weird-Science! What is Wisdomology?
] Post subject >  Part One of the Article  /  7 April 07  /
.
>>> Even science rests on a number of unproven, philosophical assumptions.
>>> Even atheists don't have the absolute truth.
>>> Who gets to decide what is rational? (You?!! Ha!)
>>> [from a quote in 'Answering believers' by Hume's Razor, ]
>>> [in chapter: 9. Postmodern relativism / 4 April 2007]
.
] In 'Replacement for religion' on 3Apr, homunculus wrote: [snip]
] What if anything is needed in the absence of religion?
.
tx say: hey ho; whatever it is, it's bound to be mighty weird. :(
.
] The way I see it--which is of course limited, due to my
] inherent emotional subjectivity-
.
 Kierkegaard say: "Truth is Subjectivity!", and I tend to agree,
so there's nothing here to apologize for.
.
] -religions are fiction-based explanations about afterlife fantasy and horror
] plus over-earnest advice about how to get along with others. Remove these
] simplifications from the scene and things start to become non-fiction based.
] What could be better? [snip]
.
Only more of the same, maybe? :)
.
. . . beyond materialism and empiricism
.
>> In 'Re: High-powered telescope' tx previously wrote: [snip] The question is
>> not 'When will it happen?', the question is: Will you be ready for it? Will you
>> be strong enough to take those all-important first few steps? If you are ...
.
 tx say: Okay, okay. I know: "Cliffhangers izt Verbotten!" So maybe I shouldn't
just leave you all hanging on the edge of a cliff like that. But what more is there
to say? The specialist-worldview is pretty much supreme these days. Totally
gung-ho, really. So it's not just a question of technique anymore; there is more
going on here than just finding the best-method. It's also a matter of *attitude*.
Why is the arrogance of Science so dangerous? It's because Science tends to
blind us to the mystery and complexity of Reality. It tends to make everyone
think that truth is a simple and straight-forward thing that only needs to be
uncovered or pointed at to be revealed in all its glory and fullness. Well, let me
tell you that the “truth” is anything but simple.
.
 The entire Cosmos is VAST; including life, the universe, and everything. And it
is *all* complex and mysterious! Why shouldn't knowledge and truth be likewise:
complex and mysterious? And vast (like our ignorance)? Accordingly, there is
little justification for Science's attitude toward things that it is ill-equipped to
understand. Indeed, this arrogance born of scientific-expertise-via-specialization
is it's own worst enemy. It will never do as a working Method-of-Operation in any
sophisticated scientific investigation; and, in fact, must be thrown out right from
the get-go. This first baby-step in the right direction is essential! I cannot stress
this enough. If you're not part of the solution, then you're part of the problem.
.
>> [snip] Wisdom can't even be easily found under such appalling conditions,
>> let alone analyzed and quantified. This is, and indeed must be, a major
>> problem all around [snip]
.
 If you can see that this total lack of wisdom in science, philosophy, religion, and
politics is indeed the major source of many of today's most pressing problems
(eg. over-population, pollution, warfare (eg. drug-wars and religious-wars),
fascism, collective-obesity in the midst of mass starvation, etc etc) then you, sir,
are miles ahead of both the masses and the experts. But having admitted that
there is a serious lack of wisdom where it is most needed, what can be done now
to address the problem?
.
. . . on giving birth to a new science
.
]  Welcome to Planet Earth, where Belief masquerades as Knowledge!
]  This way to the Unasked Questions --->
]  <--- This way to the Unquestioned Answers
]  ( -- Mia's sig-lines )
.
>> If only there was *some* rational and objective means by which to get a
>> handle on these strange and slippery critters called 'wisdom' and 'spirit'.
.
But a "rational and objective means" would seem to imply some kind of a science;
a science about Wisdom & Spirit ! ... Or maybe some kind of neo-platonic and/or
neo-hegelian science-of-spirit? This latter type of "grand-thinking" has surely
been tried many times before; but it has always turned out to be, at best, a kind
of pseudo-science, more metaphysics and theology than anything resembling
so-called "hard-science". That sort of thing will never do!
.
Any new wisdom-science will have to avoid the fanciful extremes of metaphysical
speculation. And the only way it *can* be done is to make it a top priority to
provide a reasonably (and relatively) accurate description of reality as it is found
(rather than how we may think it ought to be). On the other hand, it will not be
quite like the other sciences or humanities that deal with human nature and
activities. It will therefore share some features with things like psychology,
sociology, anthropology, and so on; yet it will be noticeably distinct from all of
these as well, and not bound by the restrictions that encumber each of them.
.
And how do you build this new science-of-Sophia? Very carefully, to be sure.
You have to start from the basics and very slowly and very carefully build from
there. Our basic philosophical standpoint then, must be that of naive-realism.
Here then are the basic facts: the world is as we see it; this (apparent) world is
consistent and regular over time, being subject to a wide variety of universal
laws (eg. gravity); and human beings are creatures caught up in the evolutionary
processes and developments of biology and civilization. Our realistic starting
point also has another great advantage: it prevents us from falling into the trap
of importing theology in through the back door, because one of the chief axioms
of Wisdomology is that: Thou shalt NOT introduce unknown and/or intangible
entities for which there is NO evidence! And this means that we can send all the
gods and angels and demons packing *before* we even set to work.
.
. . .  :D
.

+
] wwwSite > SamHarris.org Reader Forum Index ->  #8
] Forum > Politics, Religion and Science > Faith (General Issues)
] Thread title > Weird-Science! What is Wisdomology?
] Post subject >  Part Two of the Article  /  7 April 07  /
.
. . . just what is wisdom and spirit anyway
.
 A more immediate top priority is to provide some definitions for the two key
terms defining the focus of our allegedly unique and particular study. Thus the
first piece of evidence that concerns us is obviously the wisdom-literature of the
ancient-near-east, which dates back to 5000 years and more, and is based on
oral traditions thousands of years older still. Wisdom-literature therefore has a
much longer history than any other literary form; with the significant exception
of poetry. It is significant, because the Tanakh / Old Testament is a collection
of ancient literary forms including myth, history, narrative, poetry, fiction,
philosophy ... and wisdom. Even more significantly, the boundaries between
these types are *very* fluid, such that any attempt to section them apart may
be necessary and convenient, but is also logically suspect.
.
But even so, the oldest layers of the textual traditions are plain enough for all to
see: the wisdom-literature, which has its roots deep in the culture and world of
ancient-egypt. Therefore the holy-bible so popular among the current generation
of christians demonstrates a direct link between ancient-egypt and modern-
american bible-based christianity. Clearly these are very strong and lasting textual
-traditions; and their "eternal" influence demands an adequate explanation. What
is also clear is that "the Faith" began *there* with the priests and sages and kings
of ancient-egypt ... but especially with the Pharaoh Amen-hotep IV. All of this
suggests that there is some hope for continuity in the texts that we find and deem
relevant to our strange-inquiry. And continuity among all of the world's greatest
literature (given its obviously varied and abundant forms) is surely a key element
to the science-of-sophia.
.
 Anyway, "wisdom" is basically just 'the right thing to do'. It is focused on action
and being, not thought, and its end is 'the good life'. Such a life would include
things like peace and happiness; in contrast to a life of warfare, which is action
focused on violence and gain, on destruction and misery for land and glory, on
death and plunder at the price of human blood. Defining wisdom is thus easy
compared to the other, because wisdom - at least - has tangible expression in
"solid" spiritual-realities (eg. as in sacred scriptures and philosophical texts).
Philosophically speaking, then, the opposite of wisdom is not stupidity as such,
but rather a lack of authenticity, and an abundance of boredom (ie. what the
sage would call "life without meaning").
.
 But 'spirit' is another matter. Spirit doesn't normally find consistent expression
in *any* single type of narrative literature! Rather, music and poetry and art are
all more and better suited to be more direct expressions of spirit. In some ways
this is unfortunate for us, as we much prefer the "nakedness" and "clarity" of the
textual-evidence, but evidence of spirit cares not for such petty limitations. And
this suggests that spirit is much more closely connected to the vital processes of
living human minds. Thus there's no sense ruling out the possibility that spirit can
find expression in narrative, but even such a thing could never exhaust or contain
the energies and movements of active-spirit.
.
 Spirit is thus as natural a part of human life as civilizations and societies and
cultures, as they move through time and history; growing, flourishing, decaying,
dying. So spirit expresses itself primarily (exclusively?) in and through individual
human beings, but is a phenomena concerned with reason and vitality, with
cultures and civilizations, and ultimately with the very being and welfare of all
humanity. If we want to give all of this weird-stuff a name, we might as well call
it something like 'Logos' in its most vital and particular forms, and just plain old
'spirit' in its more general or vague forms.
.
. . . on the virtues of flexibility
.
 So if you're with me so far, then the next step is to ask what other requirements
are needed to be able to see the basic shape and form of our proposed new
science-of-sophia. Can this enterprise consistently and rationally grapple with
such intangible and untouchable concepts/realities as 'wisdom' and 'spirit'?
What would such a technique or 'science-of-sophia' involve for a researcher or
investigator seeking to create or define such a weird-science? And what would be
its chief source of data, its raw working materials? Well, these are all good and
necessary questions, and merit adequate and detailed answers. The first thing
that such a proposed 'sophia-scientist' needs is a very strong dose of imagination
and flexibility. Without both of these qualities in "maximum-quantities" the sophia-
scientist is lost before he even begins.
.
 With a little flexibility in all our thinking and reasoning we can have objective
facts and information about intangible and spiritual human realities (such as
'wisdom' and 'reason'). And we can have them chiefly by way of literature. The
specific kinds of literature that we are looking for will have to be identified and
cataloged and classified and categorized so as to sub-divide the unruly mass into
workable and cohesive groups. Every science requires an endless source of
relevant information, and the raw data of science-of-sophia is human literature in
all its forms (including all the sacred and profane texts from around the world).
.
 If used properly, flexibility can provide us with "confidence without carelessness,
maximum efficiency with minimum effort" (Moench-97). Another essential
prerequisite (on the imagination and flexibility side) is a strong love for art & music
& poetry (all lumped together under the general category of Art), for these three
things are (in various ways) essential and important to the science-of-sophia. That
is to say, they are all *more* than they "seem to be" from the limited perspective
of a physicist or an extreme materialist ... or a dog, for that matter! :)
.

+
] wwwSite > SamHarris.org Reader Forum Index ->  #9
] Forum > Politics, Religion and Science > Faith (General Issues)
] Thread title > Weird-Science! What is Wisdomology?
] Post subject >  Part Three of the Article  /  7 April 07  /
.
. . . why Art is such a big dawg
.
And moreover, much can be learned from Art that can contribute to our efforts.
For example, recorded history begins technically with written languages;
and the early prototypes were the less precise written-sign-languages (eg.
cuneiform carved into stone and clay-tablets). But these have even deeper
roots in the symbol-language of earlier times. And these, of course, all grew
out of oral communication; ie. spoken languages go back perhaps several
millions of years. If words (both spoken and written) are flexible and imprecise
(even while striving for clarity), how much more so is the use of symbols as a
way to communicate concepts and ideas? We still do this all the time, of course;
but think about what it would be like if it was your sole and *exclusive* means
of meaningful expression? That is an *entirely* different matter! It involves an
entirely different state of mind, an entirely different relationship with others
and with your surroundings; a world, in short, that looks and feels completely
different from anything that modern literate people could possibly comprehend,
and that's for damn sure!
.
 Therefore, in the misty and primeval beginnings of recorded history, languages
and symbols were Art; and served the same function, more or less, that poetry
and painting does today. Except that in those early days Art was ALL; Art was
powerful and meaningful and relevant and sacred. There were no art critics
forty thousand years ago. That was around the time that the first 'new-breed'
of hominids made an appearance, and soon made their presence felt in the
Mediterranean Basin area. These were the first modern-type hominids, Cro-
Magnon, who used symbols and pictures to make a record of their world; eg.
hunting scenes and such. In other words, Art is Life!
.
 In the same way, the raw data of History will also need to be included within
the range of our concerns. We need both art-in-general (ie. including music and
poetry in the same general category) and universal-history to define and collect
the raw materials we need to study for the relevant facts we need. The stuff we
must use as our basic working-material is therefore literature. All literature, in
all its forms, is potentially included as possible sources of information and/or
wisdom. We want only the most relevant and pertinent documents, of course,
but *nothing* can be ruled out in advance, or without just cause.
.
. . . on the benefits of existentialism
.
> In 'On Puny-Little-Animals' tx wrote: [snip] Russell was not much impressed
> with Existentialism as a part of the philosophic enterprise. He considered it
> a waste of time, more or less. Why study puny-little-animal when the Great
> Cosmic Mystery beckons for our complete and undivided attention? This is
> the grounds and justification for the detached and impersonal ways of both
> science and philosophy; the reason why most scientists and philosophers
> refuse to get involved with the ongoing battle for the hearts and minds of the
> People. Even Science must have its comforting illusions I suppose, and this
> is surely one of them. But there is plenty enough mystery in these "puny-
> little-animals" to keep philosophers busy for quite a spell, I expect.
.
 Another thing that is required of us is a healthy dose of Existentialism (and I
don't mean existentialism of the negative 'oh-woe-iz-me' type championed by
Kierkegaard, Sartre, Camus, and that lot). This is because, of all the major
philosophical systems, Existentialism is the only one that takes human-being
seriously, as a subject that is indeed worthy of sustained philosophical
investigation. Existentialism begins from the understanding that human-being is
necessarily full of mystery and complexity. And unlike all the other philosophies
and sciences and theologies that deal with humankind, it is the only one that
does not claim to offer complete or final or absolute answers to all your
curiosity-needs.
.
 Existentialism also makes no bones about accepting the fact that man is an
animal, like other animals in *many* ways, and as such is subject to all the
flaws and limitations inherent in being a mere creature of the earth. Man is
indeed distinguished from other animals by being a rational, political, moral,
and spiritual being, but this does not negate the equally important fact that
fundamentally man is still an irrational creature largely driven by irrational
urges, desires, emotions, and impulses. And even more important to us than all
this is that Existentialism also takes seriously the idea that man is an historical
creature; humanity is human-being-in-process. Man is in Time, and in History,
just as he is in Space, and in Society. Humankind is thoroughly and completely
"embedded" within Reality as a whole (as a part of that very same cosmos).
.

+
] wwwSite > SamHarris.org Reader Forum Index ->  #10
] Forum > Politics, Religion and Science > Faith (General Issues)
] Thread title > Weird-Science! What is Wisdomology?
] Post subject >  Part Four of the Article  /  7 April 07  /
.
. . . not enough love due to a lack of reason
.
 Moreover, human-being is structured such that rational behavior is the
*exception*, and not the norm; and this is the key to understanding the nature
of the historical dialectic (ie. the ongoing movement toward rationality, then
away from it, then toward again). The progress of civilizations through the
centuries is like a slow upward spiral, always gaining and losing ground as we
inch our way cautiously forward. Positive change radiates outward from many
exceptional individuals who show others the path ahead. People get the idea
and spread it. And then they love it so much that they keep on spreading it long
after the need for a better idea has arrived. The masses are way too much like
stubborn sheep eager to follow the wrong path! You want to talk about original
-sin? This is it right here. This has always been the case throughout history,
and there is no reason to suppose that human nature has changed in any
significant way lately. So the more people you have, the more dummies you get!
.
 That would explain a lot about the historical situation that the human race
faces today; as regards, for example, things like the war between religions and
ideologies, the "invisible" war against drugs, violence as cultural-expression,
the Law used by the ruling class as a weapon of tyranny and oppression against
citizens, and more, not to mention the rising tide of fascism. Most people are
caught between a dozen different ages, ranging from neolithic culture and
values and thinking, to the bronze-age, to the dark-ages and right up to post-
modern times. They are caught without a clue as to whiter they came, and
where to go. It's a confusing situation, and people don't know what to think.
And who can blame them? Humankind has never before faced such problems
and challenges as these.
.
 And as long as *more* people are *more* irrational than rational, then there's
precious-little hope that things will improve in the long run. Things are critical
now! It's a crisis-situation that's going terminal fast. We have to "make" people
(a lot of people!) a lot more rational; and we have to do it soon. But how? This
is the question that ought to be occupying the minds and resources of all the
many and various leaders of the many and various nations, countries, and states.
It is, in fact, the only "political issue" that really matters; both in the short term,
and in the long term. So how can we help/assist/aid/coerce/entice/etc all the
people to take a real-big-bite of Reason?
.
 ... Yeah, that's what I say. Mr Harris is right; pacifism in this absurd context
IS immoral! So there's also *that*.
.
 But wait! What if some smart-techs could invent a Weapon-of-Mass-Modification
(WMM)? And what if this smart-machine could specifically target the portion of
the brain controlling emotional responses? And what if this 'Smart-Ray' could
knock out exactly half of it (all of it would be a disaster, of course); not to
destroy, but merely to dampen? … This would give reason and rational thinking
a bit of space to breathe freely, some much needed elbow room, as it were.
Would we be violating people's rights in the most horrific way by forcing
modification upon them against their (clearly-expressed) will? And all in the
name of the greater-good? People would surely hate it enormously. At first, yes;
but gradually they would get used to having a lot less needless and wasteful
histrionics messing up the place. Then they would even learn to like it; and soon
after learn to love it. Everyone applauds, and the inventor of the Smart-Ray is
dubbed a hero! ... Whose rights were violated again? :(
.
- endit -
x