I think what is fascinating about the alt-right and to some extent many people throughout history is their fascination with the Jewish conspiracy. In a time in which is seems like much of our past mythology has become irrelevant to contemporary thinking, this still persists.

I think many people anticipate the use of myths as understanding to decrease as we gain scientific & historical knowledge. But I'm worried that new myths are rising, in many cases dangerous myths. I have 2 theories why, perhaps both are at play.

* The first of which is the fact that living a hyper-polarised post-truth reality politically will necessarily create new myths. Why is the other side so evil? Are they being mislead or is it in their nature? This has been commonly seen throughout history in traditional tribalism, i.e. Catholics and protestants. However it seemed to be on a downwards trend until recently (perhaps this is just a spike).

* The second of which is far more insidious. I believe in the past no one person understood all fields, but generally there were specialists in each fields that had a decently comprehensive understanding of their discipline at the time.

System's complicate continually, i.e. advanced society and the portion of the system anyone is capable of understanding is shrinking.
Meaning no one individual can understand the chaos.

The issue here is the human mind latches to order and in the absence of a real understanding will come those with convincing false narratives about said system, and feed people what they want to believe, the new mythology. I think we may be seeing myth resurface as a means (perhaps the primary means) of understanding things beyond our comprehension. To clarify, not in scientists but in the everyman.


What is fascinating about the modern liberals is their self-righteousness and self-glorification.

You're just denying that people are able to think.

So why do myths even exist?
* Asymmetry of information
* Facts that people are able to access

1) Jewish conspiracy theories didn't come out of anywhere. If someone is acting suspicious, then it's not a crime to suspect him, is it?
If you don't agree with it we can discuss it in more detail.

2) Amount of myths that exist is not defined by scientific & rational thinking. It's about how much verifiable information is actually available

3) > Why is the other side so evil? Because in that way you called it. Without any explanation.

4) > This has been commonly seen throughout history in traditional tribalism, i.e. Catholics and protestants.
There's no further explanation either. I don't also see any connection between myths and tribalism.

5) I think that you're wrong about system complications. It's of course getting more complicated. But the reason why there are fewer people with comprehensive understanding is mass education. As a society, we decided to choose specialization over comprehensive knowledge because in that way we'll get greater knowledge coverage. So we just use people more effectively. It doesn't mean that we can't return to the old practice of comprehensive education.

6) All your post is full of elitism and patronizing attitude. Which is a really funny thing assuming you're left-leaning. Keep in your head that you could be a victim of false narratives too.

@awethon Hey, let me try to respond to these. First of all, I was not trying to make an inflammatory partisan statement so apologies if that's how it came off.

1) I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this, could you rephrase this?

2) I agree with you, but currently, for better or worse, the means of verifying information is the scientific method. It does not produce anything epistemically certain I agree, but there's little doubt it works better than many of the previous models.

3) "Why is the other side so evil?" Perhaps I'm speaking from experience here but I don't feel as if I'm straw-manning anyone here, there's without a doubt a meaningful amount of people who entirely dismiss write off the "other-side" as hopelessly mislead or evil.

4) Let me elaborate a little, as I believe the human mind clings to order and also often rejects the other, there is often a gap between the perception of the other and the reality of the other. For example, in European colonialism, the colonisers create a whole series of scientific myths (phrenology etc) as a posthoc rationalisation for why enslavement and exploitation were ethical.

I suppose your issue could come from a belief I have, the belief that fundamentally tribalism is a faculty in the brain (the other produces a disgust reaction). Humans being "the rational animal" must come up with a rational reason why they are disgusted or admit their true nature.

5) I mostly agree with this but I think it works in tandem with my perspective, I believe that because society has become so much more complicated it is necessary for specialisation. Assuming the standard of education is static, society could not remain as complex if everyone were to receive a comprehensive education. That's not necessarily to make a value judgement that a complex system is a good system.

6) I am very much aware of false narratives and I don't think the world can be fully understood through any individual narrative.

I am sorry you feel I am a patronising elitist, I'm just trying to formulate some thoughts I have. I appreciate the opportunity to defend them.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves. A STEM-oriented instance.

An inclusive free speech instance.
All cultures and opinions welcome.
Explicit hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.
We federate with all servers: we don't block any servers.