I want to sort through my thoughts here and ask for your patience.
First, today's essay is timely and thought-provoking for me. I like the intersection of politics and spirituality and need to understand the difference between off-the-skids skewed thinking and deep, intuitive 'real' understanding. You bump up right against it here:
"In the past few decades, not only evangelical Christianity but charismatic, apocalyptic, Pentacostal, and formerly fringe prophetic sects have become predominant in public and political life. As described in Matthew Taylor’s new volume The Violent Take it By Force, these movements combine direct spiritual experience with a religious interpretation of current events — a powerful combination, to be sure. I have a peak experience, with a felt sense of noetic certainty, and with that same certainty, I understand and shape current events."
At what point is this shared understanding/certainty in fact paranoid conspiracy theory vs. a deep understanding of twisted, skewed groupthink? Particularly when you refer to these hallucinations and messages as received during prayer or psychedelic experiences.
A large part of what you do in your life and practice deals with psychedelics and spirituality.
The question becomes, how do you know your experiences, your noetic understanding, are real versus bizarre, tinfoil-hat stuff?
And perhaps my answer is: the ability to bear cognitive dissonance?
I love these questions more than any answers I could provide. I've been thinking about your question for twenty years -- here's something I wrote about it in 2005. http://zeek.net/jay_0507.shtml I think there are many procedures for the discernment you're talking about. Have I gone from subjective experience to ontological truth? Does my view track others that seem delusory (e.g. "I am the messiah")? What's at stake: how much do I need to hold this belief? Does it align with other values I hold dear (e.g. compassion)?
There is also boring old rationality, on the non-subjective side. E.g., does anti-vaccine science hold up to scientific scrutiny? (It does not.) Does it make some valid points about how dangerous side-effects are sometimes minimized in the name of some other priority? (I think so; I'm still 100% pro-vaxx.) Some conspiracy theories turn out to be partly true, others completely false.
Finally, I notice when I'm very attached to certain views -- in this piece, the view that Kilmar is definitely completely totally innocent -- and doubt myself almost reflexively. In other words, I agree with your last point. Can I accommodate some cognitive dissonance and 'not knowing' -- not as a copout but after doing my best to figure it out? Much to explore, and more questions than answers again!
"In the coming weeks, I’ll have more to say about how religious enthusiasm (in particular, the zeal of the conservative-religious convert) is driving some of the anti-democratic forces within the administration. But it’s true across the political spectrum."
I am really looking forward to your upcoming posts on this subject. I have been following the rise of "post-liberal" Catholics, and what just a few years ago seemed so fringe now seems to have become a fixture in the conservative movement. I am guessing you have listened to the interview with Ross Douthat on Ezra Klein's podcast last week. Ross is, of course, a more traditional conservative, and I'd love to hear your take on his perspective. (Not to mention Klein's perspective. It was a very interesting conversation.)
Sometimes it feels like these times are almost too interesting to bear.
Keep up your excellent work
I want to sort through my thoughts here and ask for your patience.
First, today's essay is timely and thought-provoking for me. I like the intersection of politics and spirituality and need to understand the difference between off-the-skids skewed thinking and deep, intuitive 'real' understanding. You bump up right against it here:
"In the past few decades, not only evangelical Christianity but charismatic, apocalyptic, Pentacostal, and formerly fringe prophetic sects have become predominant in public and political life. As described in Matthew Taylor’s new volume The Violent Take it By Force, these movements combine direct spiritual experience with a religious interpretation of current events — a powerful combination, to be sure. I have a peak experience, with a felt sense of noetic certainty, and with that same certainty, I understand and shape current events."
At what point is this shared understanding/certainty in fact paranoid conspiracy theory vs. a deep understanding of twisted, skewed groupthink? Particularly when you refer to these hallucinations and messages as received during prayer or psychedelic experiences.
A large part of what you do in your life and practice deals with psychedelics and spirituality.
The question becomes, how do you know your experiences, your noetic understanding, are real versus bizarre, tinfoil-hat stuff?
And perhaps my answer is: the ability to bear cognitive dissonance?
I love these questions more than any answers I could provide. I've been thinking about your question for twenty years -- here's something I wrote about it in 2005. http://zeek.net/jay_0507.shtml I think there are many procedures for the discernment you're talking about. Have I gone from subjective experience to ontological truth? Does my view track others that seem delusory (e.g. "I am the messiah")? What's at stake: how much do I need to hold this belief? Does it align with other values I hold dear (e.g. compassion)?
There is also boring old rationality, on the non-subjective side. E.g., does anti-vaccine science hold up to scientific scrutiny? (It does not.) Does it make some valid points about how dangerous side-effects are sometimes minimized in the name of some other priority? (I think so; I'm still 100% pro-vaxx.) Some conspiracy theories turn out to be partly true, others completely false.
Finally, I notice when I'm very attached to certain views -- in this piece, the view that Kilmar is definitely completely totally innocent -- and doubt myself almost reflexively. In other words, I agree with your last point. Can I accommodate some cognitive dissonance and 'not knowing' -- not as a copout but after doing my best to figure it out? Much to explore, and more questions than answers again!
"In the coming weeks, I’ll have more to say about how religious enthusiasm (in particular, the zeal of the conservative-religious convert) is driving some of the anti-democratic forces within the administration. But it’s true across the political spectrum."
I am really looking forward to your upcoming posts on this subject. I have been following the rise of "post-liberal" Catholics, and what just a few years ago seemed so fringe now seems to have become a fixture in the conservative movement. I am guessing you have listened to the interview with Ross Douthat on Ezra Klein's podcast last week. Ross is, of course, a more traditional conservative, and I'd love to hear your take on his perspective. (Not to mention Klein's perspective. It was a very interesting conversation.)
Sometimes it feels like these times are almost too interesting to bear.