"can a society survive indefinitely without a shared conception of what is good?" Probably not. We just don't know where to draw the line, when to stop as humans - everyone has a different opinion and really, we can only tolerate one another's view to an extent. So many things that started as compassion for fellow humans turned into very slippery slopes - assisted suicide, gay rights, reproductive rights, "free love", etc. As a non-Christian, I wouldn't be comfortable with Christianity as a shared conception. Not that we are taking a poll here, but my vote for shared values would be the Noahide Laws.
Time did not start in the year A.D. 1, so Smith's phrasing "holding ALL time together" is obviously intended to refer to pre-Christian practices in addition to Christian tradition itself.
This also explains why Smith chooses Christmas specifically, rather than the actual holiest day of the Christian year (= Easter Sunday). Unlike Easter Sunday, which is solely and entirely Christian, Christmas has close ties to ancestral pagan faiths especially in terms of its placement on the calendar.
Jesus, after all, was born in late spring—this is straightforward to prove from the Biblical narratives. (Shepherds lying in the fields all night keeping watch means that it was lambing season, which is mid- to late spring; and Luke 2:1-4 says a Roman census was being taken at the time, which means late spring to early summer.)
But Christmas is in midwinter... because earlier, ancestral new-year celebrations (originally from pagan pre-Christian societies) marked the winter solstice. Early Christians turned the winter solstice into their Christmas celebration, so that they would continue to have that celebration in common with other groups who lived in the same areas. (They also kept the symbolism of a tree to represent new life from the old pagan traditions; this became our modern Christmas tree.)
So, I am, as I have undoubtedly stated in your presence in the past, fundamentally an *actual* anarchist from a philosophical perspective, though admittedly, that's a "Western, Enlightenment" flavored anarchist at that. Ultimately, "Live and let live" is a pretty solid expression of my ideals.
But "anarchism" is also like the physics of philosophy, and I'm an engineer at heart. So I'm not stupid enough to think the species is actually *ready* for anarchism of any flavor. The sort of anarchism I subscribe to requires a *lot* of self discipline.
I don't think God, of any sort, is actually *required* to be involved. I think a number of prejudices of Christianity are unnecessary for a society to function. But I do think the Western Enlightenment which grew out of Christian Philosophy is thus far the best basis for a society that our species has come up with yet, at least in any history that's recorded.
The societies that we both live in -- separated by a national border as they are -- are strongly diverging from that ideal. I don't see that as a good thing.
I think I largely agree with you. At least in that Christianity is not necessary a requirement of a functional society, but given that we live in the West, it's values are likely the foundation upon what we would find acceptable.
Feminism is an inevitable development of modern liberalism, its dissolution of hierarchy, and the power of the postmodernist overarching narrative about oppression which has replaced the established church of God. Our new secular religion is based on the grand narrative of the oppressor and the oppressed; original sin has become white privilege, blasphemy has morphed into cancel culture. Moral inversion has become a tool of statecraft. This new powerful narrative provides its adherents with unshakable mortal certainty, purpose, and belonging. Radical zeal fills empty lives, confers new meaning, a soothing balm to nihilistic ennui. These revolutionary insights and fervour flow from the post-war open society ideology which sought deliberately to weaken the bonds of family, faith and nation. Our civilisation now lacks an anchoring teleology.
Feminism has had many waves. There was nothing inherently wrong with demanding equality. However, as is the case with many activist led initiatives, feminism has been hijacked by extremists and has diverge from its initial goal of equality. Primarily because that goal was achieved.
Activists never declare victory, they simply move the goal posts.
"can a society survive indefinitely without a shared conception of what is good?" Probably not. We just don't know where to draw the line, when to stop as humans - everyone has a different opinion and really, we can only tolerate one another's view to an extent. So many things that started as compassion for fellow humans turned into very slippery slopes - assisted suicide, gay rights, reproductive rights, "free love", etc. As a non-Christian, I wouldn't be comfortable with Christianity as a shared conception. Not that we are taking a poll here, but my vote for shared values would be the Noahide Laws.
I'm not sure those laws would fly in today's environment but they look fine to me.
I could live with the last five of them.
Time did not start in the year A.D. 1, so Smith's phrasing "holding ALL time together" is obviously intended to refer to pre-Christian practices in addition to Christian tradition itself.
This also explains why Smith chooses Christmas specifically, rather than the actual holiest day of the Christian year (= Easter Sunday). Unlike Easter Sunday, which is solely and entirely Christian, Christmas has close ties to ancestral pagan faiths especially in terms of its placement on the calendar.
Jesus, after all, was born in late spring—this is straightforward to prove from the Biblical narratives. (Shepherds lying in the fields all night keeping watch means that it was lambing season, which is mid- to late spring; and Luke 2:1-4 says a Roman census was being taken at the time, which means late spring to early summer.)
But Christmas is in midwinter... because earlier, ancestral new-year celebrations (originally from pagan pre-Christian societies) marked the winter solstice. Early Christians turned the winter solstice into their Christmas celebration, so that they would continue to have that celebration in common with other groups who lived in the same areas. (They also kept the symbolism of a tree to represent new life from the old pagan traditions; this became our modern Christmas tree.)
Interesting take. Thanks for the comment alewifey!
So, I am, as I have undoubtedly stated in your presence in the past, fundamentally an *actual* anarchist from a philosophical perspective, though admittedly, that's a "Western, Enlightenment" flavored anarchist at that. Ultimately, "Live and let live" is a pretty solid expression of my ideals.
But "anarchism" is also like the physics of philosophy, and I'm an engineer at heart. So I'm not stupid enough to think the species is actually *ready* for anarchism of any flavor. The sort of anarchism I subscribe to requires a *lot* of self discipline.
I don't think God, of any sort, is actually *required* to be involved. I think a number of prejudices of Christianity are unnecessary for a society to function. But I do think the Western Enlightenment which grew out of Christian Philosophy is thus far the best basis for a society that our species has come up with yet, at least in any history that's recorded.
The societies that we both live in -- separated by a national border as they are -- are strongly diverging from that ideal. I don't see that as a good thing.
I think I largely agree with you. At least in that Christianity is not necessary a requirement of a functional society, but given that we live in the West, it's values are likely the foundation upon what we would find acceptable.
Feminism is an inevitable development of modern liberalism, its dissolution of hierarchy, and the power of the postmodernist overarching narrative about oppression which has replaced the established church of God. Our new secular religion is based on the grand narrative of the oppressor and the oppressed; original sin has become white privilege, blasphemy has morphed into cancel culture. Moral inversion has become a tool of statecraft. This new powerful narrative provides its adherents with unshakable mortal certainty, purpose, and belonging. Radical zeal fills empty lives, confers new meaning, a soothing balm to nihilistic ennui. These revolutionary insights and fervour flow from the post-war open society ideology which sought deliberately to weaken the bonds of family, faith and nation. Our civilisation now lacks an anchoring teleology.
Feminism has had many waves. There was nothing inherently wrong with demanding equality. However, as is the case with many activist led initiatives, feminism has been hijacked by extremists and has diverge from its initial goal of equality. Primarily because that goal was achieved.
Activists never declare victory, they simply move the goal posts.
Thanks for the comment Steve!