Mysteriousness. I do not agree with this point as it is made. I can reconcile what I believe with the idea I think I see behind your point; but I may be wrong.
I do not agree with that because it seems to me you are implying that mysteriousness is always an excuse, without any other use. I think it is possible to genuinely want to answer questions, and dissolve mysteries as they appear, but to at the same time acknowledge the existence of as of yet non resolved ones.
I don’t know if we will ever solve all interesting, non trivial mysteries, but I hope that our fun space isn’t closed. What I believe will have precious little effect on what is, but, meanwhile, since I do recognize that there’s always going to be something beneath my horizon, to be discovered, I can generalize a concept of mysteriousness, the things that I haven’t seen yet, that will agreeably surprise me, and which I may even, perhaps, never see.
That feeling is a bit like that of a child who knows he’s been bought a present, but doesn’t know what it will be.
But it’s more too. I’d rather have a world where I know I will never exhaust the possibilities of my fun space, where I do not have to pick every last little crumb of fun, however unpalatable, because there’s nothing else new left for me to appreciate. I want a world where I actually know that portions of my fun space will never be explored, because that space is larger than what I’ll ever explore. Portions where there could be anything.
For those portions, I think it’d be appropriate to have such a feeling of “sacred mysteriousness”. Please note, however, that what I have described may not be totally similar to mysteriousness as it is expressed by, say, religious people. But, once again, I find it hard to believe that my feelings about that would be so different from those of other people—we do possess the same brainware, yes ?
Apart from that, I do agree with most of what you wrote. I think it’d be more work to salvage whatever could be salvaged, in religion, sifting through the huge mass of stuff we won’t want, than to rebuild sacredness and other great feelings, from scratch.
One last thing, though, about religion. After having discussed with a religious person, she gave me to understand that her religion, and belief in God, acted like a sort of patch, for her mind. That’s an idea that seems to make some sense. I don’t think the human mind is necessarily very stable, complete of flawless, as it’s only been kludged together by evolution.
As such, it may be that it is possible to make it work better in some situations by applying the right; dirty hack to it. Religion could be one such hack. It sure has unpleasant side effects, but maybe the idea of a God-shaped-hole in the human mind has a very practical meaning. And maybe the hole isn’t exactly God shaped, but maybe God fits well enough in it. A bit like an agonist, binding to the hole, while not being specifically, perfectly shaped to it.
I don’t know if this point has been made, but if your uncertainty about a phenomenon’s awesomeness is dominated by a fat tail of extreme awesomeness, then usually more knowledge will make it seem less awesome.
Mysteriousness. I do not agree with this point as it is made. I can reconcile what I believe with the idea I think I see behind your point; but I may be wrong.
I do not agree with that because it seems to me you are implying that mysteriousness is always an excuse, without any other use. I think it is possible to genuinely want to answer questions, and dissolve mysteries as they appear, but to at the same time acknowledge the existence of as of yet non resolved ones.
I don’t know if we will ever solve all interesting, non trivial mysteries, but I hope that our fun space isn’t closed. What I believe will have precious little effect on what is, but, meanwhile, since I do recognize that there’s always going to be something beneath my horizon, to be discovered, I can generalize a concept of mysteriousness, the things that I haven’t seen yet, that will agreeably surprise me, and which I may even, perhaps, never see.
That feeling is a bit like that of a child who knows he’s been bought a present, but doesn’t know what it will be.
But it’s more too. I’d rather have a world where I know I will never exhaust the possibilities of my fun space, where I do not have to pick every last little crumb of fun, however unpalatable, because there’s nothing else new left for me to appreciate. I want a world where I actually know that portions of my fun space will never be explored, because that space is larger than what I’ll ever explore. Portions where there could be anything.
For those portions, I think it’d be appropriate to have such a feeling of “sacred mysteriousness”. Please note, however, that what I have described may not be totally similar to mysteriousness as it is expressed by, say, religious people. But, once again, I find it hard to believe that my feelings about that would be so different from those of other people—we do possess the same brainware, yes ?
Apart from that, I do agree with most of what you wrote. I think it’d be more work to salvage whatever could be salvaged, in religion, sifting through the huge mass of stuff we won’t want, than to rebuild sacredness and other great feelings, from scratch.
One last thing, though, about religion. After having discussed with a religious person, she gave me to understand that her religion, and belief in God, acted like a sort of patch, for her mind. That’s an idea that seems to make some sense. I don’t think the human mind is necessarily very stable, complete of flawless, as it’s only been kludged together by evolution.
As such, it may be that it is possible to make it work better in some situations by applying the right; dirty hack to it. Religion could be one such hack. It sure has unpleasant side effects, but maybe the idea of a God-shaped-hole in the human mind has a very practical meaning. And maybe the hole isn’t exactly God shaped, but maybe God fits well enough in it. A bit like an agonist, binding to the hole, while not being specifically, perfectly shaped to it.
I don’t know if this point has been made, but if your uncertainty about a phenomenon’s awesomeness is dominated by a fat tail of extreme awesomeness, then usually more knowledge will make it seem less awesome.