The argument against conceptual clarity with regard to Ultimate Things:
The Tao that can be told is not the true Tao;
Names that can be named are not true names.
Posts in: Ultimate concern
Why people change
In July 2020 I wrote the following: Two reasons people change: “Mugged by reality.” Someone’s experience creates an irreconcilable rupture with their previous beliefs. At this point they either double down on the previous beliefs and ignore experience or they change. Participate in the universe’s ongoing process of change. This requires a disciplined openness to reality. This does not come naturally; rather, it is spiritual work. It may be, in part, what the Taoists meant by wu-wei.
The death of the queen has some people pining for the Great Chain of Being. I’m also not a fan of the acid bath of modernity and capitalism, but the re-sacralization of the world will not be accomplished through bad models.
Alan Moore:
I worship a second century human headed snake god called Glycon, who was exposed as a ventriloquist’s dummy nearly 2000 years ago.
Unknown/Unknowable
Just as earlier writers would cite scripture to prove their arguments, modern writers cite science. And there’s nothing necessarily wrong with that. Science often makes claims that intersect in intriguing ways with religion. Nevertheless, I am suspicious of supporting religious claims with scientific findings—and not for the usual reasons given by those influenced by the New Atheists, i.e., science is “true” and religion is “false” or, at best, pre-scientific attempts to explain the world.
God is Ultimate Concern
A reference post, to define what I mean by God. As to the ontological status of God, I’m undecided – or perhaps more precisely, indifferent. Paul Tillich, The Essential Tillich: God is the answer to the question implied in man’s finitude; he is the name for that which concerns man ultimately. This does not mean that first there is a being called God and then the demand that man should be concerned about him.