19 thoughts on “Jesus ‘n’ Mo ‘n’ Pizzagate

    1. Did you see that Q-Nazi salute at Trump’s Ohio rally last weekend? Crazy shit happening in the Trump-Reich. And then there was the doomsday theme music to his doomsday message. And still, many Americans (and governors) feel more threatened by the Woke, or immigrants, or women…

        1. Open autocrat. Open authoritarian. The christian zealots love the idea, and look past the reality of what it means. I used to think living in the 21st century meant something when it came to common values and reality (evolution) it sucks realizing I was ahead of reality and it might not come in my lifetime, if ever. I blame cities.

          1. Open autocrat. Open authoritarian. The christian zealots love the idea,

            Well, Christianity was founded under the hob-nailed sandal of various Caesars (Tiberias and Caligula, IIRC, possibly extending to Clavdivs), and developed under a succession of emperors of various dynasties. So yeah, you’d expect that to show through in the structure of a philosophy.

            that Q-Nazi salute at Trump’s Ohio rally

            Uh, no ; didn’t see that. Since the broadcast news was massively enraptured with the Rise and Fall of the Queue, we didn’t get to see much other of the world’s events. Got a link?
            I’m inferring that the Q-movement has developed it’s own salute, which just accidentally looks very Nazi-ish. Where’s my copy of the Blues Brothers? I feel like watching the falling Nazis scene again.

  1. Religion and other conspiracy theories are memeplexes the teleological intentional animistic fallacy, the idea that everything happens for a reason, that there is intentionality behind that reason, and possibly that we humans are able to understand that intention.

    I absolutely deny the claim that there is a universal human need for religion; however, there is an archetype of people who are drawn to religion (the people whom theists characterize as having a ‘god-shaped hole’ in their hearts); when they can´t focus that emotional energy on theism, where else do they focus it? People who are raised secularly but who still have those particular personality traits, where do they gravitate?

    My (admittedly atheist & libertarian) gut feeling says they lean towards authoritarian political trends (fascism, communism, the new PC movement. mandatory environmentalism), but I’m not sure. I’ve known enough people from secular authoritarian regimes. Obviously, please take that gut feeling with a grain of salt.

  2. Just as an aside: Carl Jung invented or discovered (perhaps coined?) the word archetype. And Jung also famously said, “I don’t believe God exists. I know.”

        1. Was Jung writing in English or (one of) his native language(s)?
          You’d expect whoever was translating it into English to have checked and used the proper existing word to describe the idea Jung was expressing in (one or more of) German, Austrian, or Swiss? The same applies, of course, if Jung was translating his own work – which is a tedious slog that most authors pass off to a hired hand.

          How do translators handle neologisms – for example Dawkin’s invention of “meme”? I’d expect them to just us the author’s invention. Unless the target language contained an appropriate word which the source language lacked.

    1. There is always a lot of good criticism re. Freud, but I wonder why Jung seems to get a pass. He’s as much a loon as Freud was, imo. Maybe I’ve just missed any criticism thrown his way.

    2. Prompting the query, how did Jung “know” that? I’d guess he didn’t have a good answer that would qualify as a scientifically valid proof of god.

  3. The left is always trying to psychoanalyze their ideological opponents.
    “But one reason left-wing authoritarianism barely shows up in social-psychology research is that most academic experts in the field are based at institutions where prevailing attitudes are far to the left of society as a whole. Scholars who personally support the left’s social vision—such as redistributing income, countering racism, and more—may simply be slow to identify authoritarianism among people with similar goals.”
    And of course, their ideological opponents include Christians and (currently) conspiracy theorists.
    Back in the early days of 9/11 Truth, there was a definite link between conspiracy theory and the secular left. Today, not so much.

    Ideology does affect these studies, especially in light of the 20th Century Freudian cultural takeover, as Bruce Charlton puts it.
    “…we can see that Freud was the origin of the New Left, with its psychological focus and (racial, sexual, etc.) ‘victim groups’; which – from the middle 1960s – displaced the Old Left (which had been rooted in economics and class analysis).

    The US way of understanding was quickly (almost instantly) exported to the rest of the world, mainly by domination of mass media, but also by the US status of political hegemony.

    These and other themes were generated in the USA in the wake of the Freudian cultural-takeover back in the middle twentieth century. Freudian ideas (in culturally-adapted forms), in fact, became metaphysical assumptions: basic assumptions regarding the nature of reality – in particular the human condition.

    Mainstream US life came to be rooted in the atheism, materialism, psychologism derived from Freud and therapy; combined with a hedonism (or utilitarianism) the Americans added to it.

    This means that the framework of modern mass media – from news stories to movies and TV drama, and the interactions of social media – substantially dictates the approved content, and the status hierarchies.

    (And these are sustained and manipulated – for Their own ends – by those with power, naturally.)

    This began the process we now see at an advanced and degenerate stage of evolved corruption. Psychologism ‘infects’ many areas of American discourse; even among those who regard themselves as on The Right or at least against The Left – even among Christians!”

  4. > The left is always trying to psychoanalyze their ideological opponents.

    Always? No. And not exclusively the left, either. Some people on the left do, and some people on the right do. In my limited experience, the people on the left have tended to be more academically rigorous in doing so, rather than relying on pseudo-scientific terms like ‘unnatural’ and ‘deviant’. I’d love to see how accurate the portrayal of Red Team psychoanalysis in the gay ‘conversion’ camp in But I’m a Cheerleader (1999) really is.

    1. Okay, maybe not always, but frequently. I think you may be bit behind the times. To the dismay of social conservatives, Republicans have backed off gay marriage, let alone gay conversion therapy.
      The term “conversion therapy” has been redefined to include transgender therapy for children, instead of chemical or surgical castration/mutilation.
      You’re citing a “satirical teen comedy” from 1999?

  5. Well, I guess there is a common trait: religion as well as conspiracy ‘theories’ are beliefs not backed up by serious (or even any) evidence. Hence I’m not really surprised there would be a correlation.

  6. I wonder if such research would have been published by the editors at Nature, given their new found value of not publishing findings that may reflect poorly on some social group, even if the conclusions are well-founded…

  7. For what it’s worth, a large part of the results of the paper have to do with their selection criteria for what constitutes a “conspiracy theory”. In other words, they discovered that more religious people (who tend to be more right-wing) also to believe more in right-wing conspiracy theories.

    Controlling for the ideological bias in conspiracy theory definition would have helped a lot.

Leave a Reply