[ExI] The void left by deleting religion

[Jef Allbright]

On 5/4/07, Stathis Papaioannou <stathisp at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 04/05/07, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky <sentience at pobox.com> wrote:
>
> > What I miss most myself is comfort, the reassurance that there's a
> > higher power watching over you and that everything will turn out all
> > right.  But I know I can never have *that* back this side of the dawn,
> > and maybe not even then.  That feeling of comfort falls directly under
> > the non-negotiable prescription:  That which can be destroyed by the
> > truth should be.
>
> You obviously believe that the truth is better than falsehood and you're
> probably right. However, it is at least logically possible that widespread
> belief in a Noble Lie might have a net positive effect. In that case, is it
> still better to destroy the Lie regardless of the consequences?

This simple question highlights the immaturity of our cultural
understanding of morality (issues involving what is "better" as
above.)  It's a category error to confuse the Truth that we value with
the instrumental truth that we apply to promoting our values.

We are defined, to a large extent (the extent we would care about), by
our values.  And anyone would agree that their values, whatever they
may be, are best promoted by applying methods from their best
available model of reality, i.e. truth.

The "Nobel Lie" that you refer to would be in the category of
subjective values, not in the category of (increasingly) objective
instrumental methods.  And it would persist to the extent that it
survived the ongoing process of competition between and selection for,
values that "work."

As for the viability of a "rational religion", it can be clarified in
those same terms.  We can ask whether what we value in such
organizations, e.g. enjoyment of fellowship, ritual, shared purpose
and activities, can thrive apart from the methods (largely fear-based)
derived from that more traditional model of reality.

It seems to me that the answer is a very weak "yes", to the extent
that people find comfort in the exercise of rational decision-making.
I say "weak" because only a very small fraction of the present
population find comfort in passing through the void and coming out the
other side lacking all previously assumed means of support,  but just
as whole and much freer than before.  For the rest of the population,
smaller-context evolved creature comforts will trump the wisdom of
insecurity nearly every time.

- Jef