Join Nostr
2026-10-02 03:45:48 UTC
in reply to

gjm on Nostr: I measured it against itself, specifically the internal consistency of its claims ...

I measured it against itself, specifically the internal consistency of its claims versus its actual human practice over two millennia.

On the use of reason, I view it as an active, personal process built on life experience, continuous feedback, and cognitive discipline. It is an evolving landscape that requires ongoing self interrogation and constant awareness of our own cognitive biases. The alternative is pausing that journey by adopting a prepackaged external framework. Trusting your own reasoning is demanding work, but I choose to back my own capacity to navigate reality.

Regarding right and wrong, morality is a prosocial, cultural, and evolutionary development. It is shaped by nature, nurture, and the hard won lessons of human survival over generations. It naturally connects with personal preference because ethics are fundamentally about how conscious beings navigate shared well being together. Old systems survive for many reasons, but antiquity alone does not equal truth or moral authority.

As for things not coming for free, logic holds as an observable property of an orderly universe without needing to invoke a deity. External frameworks provide tremendous psychological comfort by easing the critical thinking load and handing over ready made answers. Moving beyond them simply means taking full undelegated responsibility for your own mind, morality, and choices.

Galileo Galilei captured this tension well when he noted, 'I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason and intellect, has intended us to forgo their use.' Whether framed spiritually or secularly, setting aside our critical faculties to fit a pre-made system is the one thing I now refuse to do. Ultimately my Christian journey resulted in a wrestle with the highest form of intellectual dishonesty I had ever personally experienced. 🙂