Youtube comments of The Archivist (@LostArchivist).

  1. 1100
  2. 255
  3. 171
  4. 124
  5. 82
  6. 65
  7. 54
  8. 43
  9. 42
  10. 33
  11. From what I can see from the comment section, political posturing continues as tragically usual. Truth is yes there were cannibals, and human sacrifices, and slavery and genocides and abuse of religion as pretext for atrocities and there were also friendships, rescues, trades, gifts of knowledge and technology and culture. This is over 500 years involving dozens to hundreds of cultures. And we are dealing with fallen human beings all around. There is no simple matter of moral high ground for either side. Yes some native cultures were morally backrupt in a variety of ways, and yes some genuinely great ones are gone. Yes the Europeans did slaughter many natives and did respect and benefit many. `We gotta give up the hope of a better past.` To quote a priest of the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal quoting from Finding Your Place in the Advent Story. Nothing we do shall change the past, no amount of posturing will magically untangle the web of sin and virtue. We are not God, whether you believe in Him or not is irrelevant to the point if you are thinking of going there. My point is we do not have either perfect knowledge of the past nor any way to stand above those who came before us and pretend we are objectively better human beings without being hypocrites, liars, and deluded fools. We weigh the scales of justice across in this light in vain. Yes there is objective moral truth and we can judge actions, but we can not judge hearts. And if we only become embittered and resurrect grudges and blood feuds, we do not go the way of God. Remember, no one can stand righteous before Him by their own merits. I say this admitting I am no better, but also seeing this entire venture of tallying dead men`s sins is futile and only drives open wounds that took centuries to begin healing. Remember Christ upon the Cross, dying for love of we who are unworthy of Heaven, because He desires our good anyway. He calls us to do the same for every other person at all times. Rebuking the sinner is a spiritual work of mercy, but eagerly delighting in denouncing any man as intrinsically of no worth or beyond possible redemption is antithetical to the Gospel. Let the Just Judge, be judge. God have mercy on us all. Through Our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ, the Just Judge, and the Divine Mercy, for all humankind. Amen.
    28
  12. 27
  13. 27
  14. 23
  15. 22
  16. 21
  17. 21
  18. 19
  19. 18
  20. 18
  21. 17
  22. 17
  23. 16
  24. 15
  25. 14
  26. 14
  27. 13
  28. 13
  29. 13
  30. 12
  31. 11
  32. 11
  33. 10
  34. 10
  35. 10
  36. 10
  37. 10
  38. 9
  39. 9
  40. 9
  41. 9
  42. 8
  43. 8
  44. 8
  45. 8
  46. 8
  47. 7
  48. 7
  49. 6
  50. 6
  51. 6
  52. 6
  53. 6
  54. 6
  55. 6
  56. 5
  57. 5
  58. 5
  59. 5
  60. 5
  61. 5
  62. 5
  63. 5
  64. 5
  65. 5
  66. 5
  67. 5
  68. 5
  69. 5
  70. 5
  71. 4
  72. 4
  73. 4
  74. 4
  75. 4
  76. 4
  77. 4
  78. 4
  79. 4
  80. 4
  81.  @AtSafeDistance  First of all, acting defensively out of fear for oneself and one`s loved ones is not stupidity, it is simply self-defense oneself and one`s loved ones. Also it was 70 years ago, our knowledge of the Universe let alone what aliens might be like was much more limited to what we know now. Knowledge of galaxies was only 40 years old at that point and we could barely imagine what it might be like out there. This is not to mention that much of what we know of quantum mechanics was barely mapped out and not proven at that time. Besides if the aliens were truly benevolent and intelligent, they would not have been so readily antagonizing obviously scared people. If indeed they were aliens, I would not say that all the blame falls on the family. There were children in the house remember. It is very easy to blame someone when you have not been in such a situation like that. Now if you have and did not, I apologize in advance. But if you have not, imagine suddenly seeing beings that you do not understand coming to you at your home inside which, is your family who you see are scared and these beings arw acting erratically and doing strange things. It is not clear what they are and are not capable of. Don`t imagine it like a picture or video, it is a physical creature out there. You have a gun and they are not going away. What else are you going to do? If the aliens wanted to communicate, after the first bullet would have been a great time to say, write something in the ground or on a tree or the like. Or maybe just leave the people alone rather than continuing to come around after it is clear they don`t want you around. If there is to be blame, it goes to both parties really. Just one of those risks when a first contact occurs. I am sorry for the gruff response, but I felt it was necessary due to the nature of your anger and hateful judgement that I believe was an unfair and rash judgement.
    4
  82. 4
  83. 4
  84. 4
  85.  @michaelriverside1139  No what I am proposing is that people were not living in an intellectual vacuum before modern science existed. I also did not say it was magnifcens. Even if I can not remember the name, that does not mean it is incorrect, it does call into question the veracity of my memory and yes that is a strike. What I am attempting to do is salvage some form of verification from antecedote by proposing evaluating stories with light from modern discovery rather than simple-mindedly declaring an unrealistic binary of pure fact or pure fiction. Past generations lived on the same planet as us and almost nothing vets pulled purely from the aether. Ignoring these ancient accounts because of intellectual pride is ignoring potential leads that could garner us insights we would be unlikely to consider. I am saying our presumption that only our methods can cast real potential light is harming the potential for the progress of scholarship. The mechanistic view of the Enlightenment has not stood up to the test of time and that attitude is a product of those preconceptions. If we can learn to translate worldview, we can better utilize another area of at least potential leads to direct our efforts for inquiry. We have limited resources, and every hypothesis has a pre-investigation justification phase. Here I am proposing is a good place to look at antecedote. If we do not establish a more integrative model, the relativists or post-modernists are simply going to cry colonialism and tear our base out anyway.
    4
  86. 4
  87. 4
  88. 3
  89. 3
  90. 3
  91. 3
  92. 3
  93. 3
  94. 3
  95. 3
  96. 3
  97. 3
  98. 3
  99. 3
  100. 3
  101. 3
  102. 3
  103. 3
  104. 3
  105. 3
  106. 3
  107. 3
  108. 3
  109. 3
  110. 3
  111. 3
  112. 3
  113. 3
  114. 3
  115. 3
  116. 3
  117. 3
  118. 3
  119. 3
  120. 3
  121. 3
  122. 3
  123. 3
  124. 3
  125. 3
  126. 3
  127. 3
  128. 3
  129. 3
  130. 3
  131. 2
  132. 2
  133.  BARBATVS 89  Sir, if you are attempting to be an evangelist then you are doing a radically poor job of it. These sorts of arrogant tirades will never draw anyone to the faith or to any point really. You are certainly not acting as a faithful representative of Christ as you speak from personal pride and with great venom and arrogance. God opposes the arrogant even if they speak the truth. I can not give you that credence however as you speak from hatred, not a righteous anger. but mere hatred, and that is not of God. A good majority of your claims are speculative and conspiratorial in content and there is simply no need for such grand presumptions. You are confusing implicit with explicit in the nature of the evil of the world. Most simply do not understand what is going on and follow what is told them about the nature of the metaphysics of the world, including our experts and leaders. People almost universally wish to do good and view what they do as good. Only the truly crazed or depraved or desperate would even consider working with an agent of explicit evil as Satan or his fallen angels are. It is by deception that the enemy turns and darkens the hearts of men. Mostly however we sin by our own will, justifying our actions by excuse. Humans are responsible for their own evil, we do not need an overarching direct conspiracy to explain that. The enemy does influence the world but in more subtle and generally unnotable ways. Work on your relationship with our Blessed Lord, brother. You have gazed at the darkness of the world for too long and have forgotten what it means to be a disciple of Christ. Please consider your own sins before you attempt to remove the splinter from your neighbor's eye. The way you are doing things will only cost people their eternal souls as it does nothing to draw them to Christ. God bless you and give you eyes to see. Amen.
    2
  134. 2
  135. 2
  136. 2
  137. 2
  138. 2
  139. 2
  140. 2
  141. 2
  142. 2
  143. 2
  144. 2
  145. 2
  146. 2
  147. 2
  148. 2
  149. 2
  150. 2
  151. 2
  152. 2
  153. 2
  154. 2
  155. 2
  156. 2
  157. 2
  158. 2
  159. 2
  160. 2
  161. 2
  162. 2
  163. 2
  164. 2
  165. 2
  166. 2
  167. 2
  168. 2
  169. 2
  170. 2
  171. 2
  172. 2
  173. 2
  174. 2
  175. 2
  176. 2
  177.  @maxgustafsson7802  Politics is not my god. Stop worshipping it. The problem is people being so wrapped up in their politics that it becomes their identity and life and has been leading to violence, demonizing, undermining the country as a whole and breaking our common culture while bringing the efforts of both sides avoidably to futility. I like things in both parties and disagree with things in both parties. And I celebrate the good in both and denounce the evil in both. Neither is frankly a good choice right now but I choose based on my best prudence, not an arbitrarily drawn line in the political spectrum. The problem is both sides losing sight of the very reason to fight for rights in the process of pursuing their goals and how it breaks everything it touches. Regardless of the issues, it is how it undermines the dignity of the opposing side that has consistently been a curse over this political paradigm right and left both. The very fact that you can not see past your own party's campaign and see others value through it as the lens is exactly the issue. People are idolizing their side as though nothing else matters and creating worse situations in the process. Again it is a matter of refusing to see the common humanity in each other's sides and not exercising common decency and respect and allowing political parties to become like gods to people, demanding all be sacrificed to them and all else be destroyed if it does not bow to them. Stop watching the shadow puppets on the wall and take a walk outside the cave.
    2
  178. 2
  179. 2
  180. 2
  181. 2
  182. 2
  183. 2
  184. 2
  185. 2
  186. 2
  187. 2
  188. 2
  189. 2
  190. 2
  191. 2
  192.  @michaelriverside1139  Combined both posts to keep the comments uncluttered.   Please consider what is being talked about here. https://youtu.be/fdwuhU_zu8Y They cover alot of my concerns alot better than I can. It was rather providential that I came across it actually. We need to set good standards but not go too far right or left here. Too far right and wr get dogmatic or oligarchic control, too far left, our brains fall out. There is a proper range and I thinl we need to look into setting it. The culture can`t be relied on to give a decent guideline since it is so polemical. We need to keep our ethics, standards, and morals straight, otherwise scientific objectivity will be undermined. I should also mention, I do not entirely agree with everything they say. Specifically regarding the role of the humanities or that universities should not have a core role as teaching institutions. Or just the assumption of STEM being necessarily prime. I do believe that is more assumed than truly proven. What I mean here is, there is clearly an imbalance that has been growing for decades now and it largely stems from focusing so much on advancing technically and not humanly and that we implicitly know we are not masters of our technological advancement but are largely captive to it (look at social media and mobile phone addictions for an example.) The fact that so many in academia are speaking of humanity being replaced with some technological invention somehow being an inevitable future in and of itself ought to be raising alarm bells. But the fact that nothing akin to these AI exist yet but are being extoled as though some panacea or messiahm by those that sound like alot like some scientific prophets; is to me just as much a sign something is fundementally off-kilter. I believe something like the Four Horsemen of Meaning approach and the work going on there will be a much more stable, fruitful, and meaningful approach.
    2
  193.  @michaelriverside1139    It`s not too surprising actually. Everyone has something of highest worth, of worthship, this is the older form of our word worship. There is a notion called hyperobjects that are essentially superhuman complexities, that comes up as an offshoot of complexity theory and chaos theory. That however is an unsurprisingly, complex subject, but may capture some of how this happens without denegrating its nature to something controllable or fully understandable. More approachable is the psychological trend that if someone dedicates all of their time and comforms to a worldview, it is a human tendency to scale value with our time and effort spent. So our worship develops even in the absence of a named god. That is where the scientism, transhumanism and the like come into play. There is a certain manipulation going on however, some of these people are attempting to hijack the cultural development process. Thus they are attempting to control the narrative and what is the truth, by denying Truth exists, while ultimately manipulating what people think. It has unsurprisingly blown up in their face to an extent though. Looking around, I see more of society fracturing along philosophical lines. Some societal bulkhead finally is giving way and we are seeing people making moves to fill the gap. But it never had to happen from a societal standpoint, it was pushed by people building polemics. Now ideological tribalism has arisen again in force. As for data and the like, on top of what I stated above, many of these people are not philosophically versed even though they are brilliant, so they do not realize the nature of logic or ideas and how we already have extensive wisdom in these areas. So they become unwitting worshippers, pulled along by their own ideologies as a result. I do not have an optimistic prognosis our society though if we continue this way, we are showing many signs of societal decay overall. I will say I believe there is a spiritual dimension to this, but I will ask you, Do you want to discuss that aspect or not?
    2
  194. 2
  195. 2
  196. 2
  197. 2
  198. 2
  199. 2
  200. 2
  201. 2
  202. 2
  203. 2
  204. 2
  205. 2
  206. 2
  207. 2
  208. 2
  209. 1
  210. 1
  211. 1
  212. 1
  213. 1
  214. 1
  215. 1
  216. 1
  217. 1
  218. 1
  219. 1
  220. 1
  221. 1
  222. 1
  223. 1
  224. 1
  225. 1
  226. 1
  227. 1
  228. 1
  229. ​ @RoninTF2011 There has been talk of a non literal interpretation for almost all of Christian history. I can not speak for Jewish tradition. But given how common symbolic numbering was back in that time period and the genre of the work it seems highly unlikely to have been considered literal. One clue to take from Saint Augustine of Hippo is, there are nights and days before the sun and moon were created. Any human being knows the need for the Sun as the cause of the day, and the Moon's association with night. If we want internal proof anyway that the Jewish writers knew these things, we need just look at the Psalms or the stories of the Old Testament. What Genesis is, is in part a liturgical procession, and a declaration that the things the neighboring nations worshipped as gods were created by God. It does serve as a creation story but at least for parts, not a literal one. Myth does not mean fiction, that idea comes ironically from the myth of the Enlightenment. Myth is something cultural, and provides wisdom and does speak of truths. Some may be of the natural sort, some moral, and some metaphysical. What I am saying is that the response of calling the Biblical stories 'just a mythos' is just a reflection of the modern mythos, which, clearly is not pure fabrication, but is not a scientific repeatable experimental empirical fact either. It is upstream of that in truth. And if caricatured as a literalistic interpretation of itself, looks even more stupid than the strawman many make of the Biblical worldview.
    1
  230. 1
  231. 1
  232. 1
  233. 1
  234. 1
  235. 1
  236. 1
  237. 1
  238. 1
  239. 1
  240. 1
  241. 1
  242. 1
  243. 1
  244. 1
  245. 1
  246. 1
  247. 1
  248. 1
  249. 1
  250. 1
  251. 1
  252. 1
  253. 1
  254. 1
  255. 1
  256. 1
  257. 1
  258. 1
  259. 1
  260. 1
  261. 1
  262. 1
  263. 1
  264. 1
  265. 1
  266. 1
  267. 1
  268. 1
  269. 1
  270. 1
  271. 1
  272. 1
  273. 1
  274. 1
  275. 1
  276. 1
  277. 1
  278. 1
  279. 1
  280. 1
  281. 1
  282. 1
  283. 1
  284. 1
  285. 1
  286. 1
  287. 1
  288. 1
  289. 1
  290. 1
  291. 1
  292. 1
  293. 1
  294. 1
  295. 1
  296. 1
  297. 1
  298. 1
  299. 1
  300. 1
  301. 1
  302. 1
  303. 1
  304. 1
  305. @JAlanne  I think I narrowed down the post (unless you mean overall but given how niche some are I assume not.) If you mean the Eucharist, well that comment was not intended to convince only explain. I did not like my previous reply to you though so I want to redo it. All human knowledge necessarily has to have both reasons and desire, (evidence or arguments to justify them and affect). This is most often and most basically from what are called qualia which, just means sensory experiences and from logic. Human knowledge is also imperfect and incomplete so there is always an element of trust and probability involved, science uses mathematics to test data's trustworthiness and likelihood (among many other uses) and replicability to support the reliability of the process and researcher on a broader level. Mathematics is grounded in logic and for its base what we can observe in the world to the extent there is a physical parallel. Different natured things require different natured qualification. One can not put something like the basic nature of existence or what is the nature of distinction asin distinction itself into a lab or even calculable data. The question of transubstantiation comes with the understanding that all physical things have two necessary aspects to make them what they are on a fundamental level as distinguished from any other thing. Form, that is the nature or essence of a thing (the twoness of the number 2 or the starness of a star like the Sun) and matter that which, makes it distinct and in existence this is something like how it is a distinct object even if it were otherwise identical to another object. This could also be called the essence and existence of a thing. These sorts of claims are philosophical so are proven primarily by logical argument though can sometimes have support by evidence. After that long aside, transubstantiation is a metaphysical change the qualia of the bread and wine do not change, what changes is the form and (metaphysical) matter. So it is best answered by philosophical means. But there are other supports in the form of eucharistic miracles where the host (the part that was bread) and the part that was wine, become human cardiac tissue and blood. Many of these have been confirmed by test and though as a scientist I would prefer they were more rigorous, there is empirical evidence and testing to support these. I can point you to some if you would like.
    1
  306. 1
  307. 1
  308. 1
  309.  @Charlie_Marley  I never claimed you did, I simply stated the theistic premise. Citing The Bible would be circular logic for proving God exists, not that He wants a personal relationship with us. If God us real, pointing to 3000 years of people claiming He wants/does relate with us, is a solid evidence for God desiring personal relationship with us. As for the Catholic Church committing evil. There is first the need to seperate anti-Catholic propaganda from true evils done by members of the Church. Then one must show these people were acting in accord with the teachings and authority of the Church. One obvious thing sticks today, the abuse crisis and cover up, but also some of the popes of the 1100s come to mind as well as the treatment by some to Native American tribes, and as internal evidence, the execution of St.Joan of Arc. Clearly members of the Church can do great harm, but no one can validly claim the Church claims we are perfect. The point of Christianitu is all of us are sinners and so need Christ to save us from the evil of our oen hearts and those of others. We are to cooperate with God's grace, but many do not. God as shown in Sacred Scripture call us to account for this scandal that leads people away from Him. This can occur because though brought into Christ's Church, we are still on the purgative way and are not saved fully from the possibility to sin until death. God does not take away our free will. It is similar for most people believing false religions. Over time, after we fell, whether by malice, neglect, ignorance, or other faults of humanity or simply cultural entropy, and/or other natural and preternatural causes, truth here as in other areas has been lost in various ways. Most religions contain elements of the Truth, as humans are oriented to the Good, the True, and the Beautiful, but we can choose evil and we have fallible knowledge. What the Church claims is that God ensures the Truth and means of salvation are preserved in Holy Mother Church regardless and at far too often times in spite of the evil of Her members. Thus, the continued existence of the Church in spite of attempts within and from without, becomes another line of evidence for the sake of Her witness to the Gospel. Even at the Crucificion, all of the Apostles but St.John betrat or abandon Christ. Because, Christ is the Redeemer and Saviir, not us, so even the Apostles needed to be redeemed and saved. It is so there us no ambiguity Who is at work saving us all and Who is thus Divine without underming anyone's free will.
    1
  310. 1
  311. 1
  312. 1
  313. 1
  314. 1
  315. 1
  316. 1
  317. 1
  318. 1
  319. 1
  320. 1
  321. 1
  322. 1
  323. 1
  324. 1
  325.  @rationald6799  So we may do anything. God set up a world with a given order to be a stable reality upheld by Him and gave us free will to choose Him. God wants us to choose to love Him out of our free will as He is able to love freelt. He needs nothing so He can love all, and that includes allowing us to reject Him even after doing all things possible up to the point of forcing us to be unable to reject Him. God does not force Himself upon us because that would not be love, that would be spiritual rape if He overrid our ability to choose for or against His Will or not or holding us hostage if He forced us to Heaven regardless of our will. But what He does enforce is that we must make the choice, whether by action or inaction. Either and our death or the Eschaton. We are in a liminal time of amnesty where we may repent and come to the King before He enforces His rule in power. Between the Ascension (or really the Incarnation) and the Eschaton is a transition period between the announcement of the King and His enforcement of His Divine Justice perfectly. Because, were God to simply enforce His Divine Justice without showing us Divine Mercy, all would fall short because God is perfect. But so that some may choose Him of their accord, God bridged that gap and paid the infinite fee if sin we owe by His own Most Precious Blood and infinitely valuable sacrifice. So God is doing alot, what He is not doing is kowtowing to our every demand or want. Were He to, He would not be God because He would be afixing His Divine Action to tge whims of a finite creature. Basically God does not have to meet our demand, He is God and though He loves us and is Merciful and gives us good things, heals us spiritually if we allow it and it is good for us on the way to eternity from this temporary place, and He forgives us and pays His own Divine Justice, He is in charge, not us. And this kind of prideful entitlement thinking God must do things our way, is exactly why He should not do things our way or allow us an eternity to do whatever we want, because we have made a disaster of what little we already have. We could do much to fix it, but we do not and continue to act out of selfish self-regard and against each other. We are not fit to rule, and for those able to see it, this is another path to finding God if they humbly look for Him. If we do not know how to love one another even to our limited understanding of that, why should we expect God Who is Perfect Love to act either as we do or as we think He should? I am glad God does not do as we exactly expect, because then He is not an intependent being but truly some collective entity born if our expectations, like the Chaos Gods from Warhammer 40K and then either there is anotger higher being, or reality is an infinite vicious circular logic loop and so is absurd.
    1
  326. 1
  327. 1
  328. 1
  329. Actually I think I remember speaking to you. It isn't so much amount of time for me, but too many first-hand accounts and cooraboration (sic) and further warrant from evidence after investigation into the question of the nature of reality and God as best I have been able to perform various times as my inquiry and analysis have increased over the years. I can not very well prove the experiences to a closed mind such as yours, so I won't waste either of our time trying that angle. Doubly if you would dismiss arguments before they are even presented to you but only proposed. If you want evidence, have and make explicit your standards in a systematic, falsifiable, parameter-controlled, and repeatable or at least analyzable fail and success conditions, preferrably with a null hypothesis and what would constitute as error conditions to be avoided. I say this because you seem to want empirical proof while being unable to or simply refusing to actually present any empirical set of conditions for acceptance or rejection to meet. Also because it implies you believe this system of rational inquiry is capable of potentially definitively giving evidence for or against the existence of God. So then you must believe a workable experiment, model,or empirical standard exists that can answer it. If you.are going to reject evidence based on some criteria, make them explicit and at least up to the standards you are demanding. If you are truly experienced on the matter you should be able to do so. And in fact if you will not accept other people's proposed criteria, you must provide yours for anyone else to know if their evidence would be valid to your call for evidence. If this all sounds like it is out of the blue. Please ignore it, it was then not you I am remembering.
    1
  330. 1
  331. 1
  332. 1
  333. 1
  334. 1
  335. 1
  336. 1
  337. 1
  338. 1
  339. 1
  340. 1
  341. 1
  342. 1
  343. 1
  344. 1
  345. 1
  346. 1
  347. 1
  348. 1
  349. 1
  350. 1
  351. 1
  352. 1
  353. 1
  354. 1
  355. 1
  356. 1
  357. 1
  358. 1
  359. 1
  360. 1
  361. 1
  362. 1
  363. 1
  364. 1
  365. 1
  366. 1
  367. 1
  368. 1
  369. 1
  370. 1
  371. 1
  372. 1
  373. 1
  374. 1
  375. 1
  376. 1
  377. 1
  378. 1
  379. 1
  380. 1
  381. 1
  382. 1
  383. 1
  384. 1
  385. 1
  386. 1
  387. 1
  388. 1
  389. 1
  390. 1
  391. 1
  392. 1
  393. 1
  394. 1
  395. 1
  396. I believe they should have explored the concept of stranger in the Abrahamic religions more, it is fairly clear stranger does not necessarily mean what they assume it to mean. This is shown actually by the fate of Cain who is preserved by God from retribution and who is said to be the father of citydwellers. Moreof, it is very hard to square the story of the patriarch Joseph with such a definition, as for Exodus itself, the Israelite people themselves are seen as coming under God`s wrath and being unfaithful and this is sadly a theme seen throughout the Old Testament, despite being God`s chosen people, they fail to live up to the calling at times. Also God promises Abraham that his descendant shall be a light to the nations, i.e., God clearly cares for them as well. Far from being a tribe-centered pat on tbe back to the might of the people or the righteousness of the rulers or the culture, it brings both to task at different times. This is to say nothing of the nuances and complexities that are problematic to this theory from traditiona in other cultures. They are just sort of assuming a universal theme based on case studies. That overlooking of pieces thay do not fit the mold is nothing new in anthropology and it almost always haunts theories from the starting gate. Now if we argue all of this simply goes much farther back than that and we can`t see evidence as these sources are all too late, well we can argue that, but it makes any cultural examples subject to the same countercritique. Fact of the matter is, any culture we see now, even if small and basic in structure are not primeval in the necessary sense. They are not necessarily more reliable sources of humanity`s initial cultural strycrure unless corroborated by a good deal of evidence from early human periods in the relevant areas. What we see on the ground needs to match what we find in the ground. The best we can hope for is to correlate fossil, molecular, archaeological and cultural data. If our oldest records go back let`s say 50`000 years (pulling from the Pelaides star cluster and accompanying traditions), and our species goes back 300,000 years, well we have cultural data going back only 1/6th of the way. That does not mean it is unreliable, indeed it has shown time and again to be, in various ways, but the quality of the information varies and often just don`t make sense to our modern perspective. Much of the information of the earliest cultures is simply lost to time due to the impermenant nature of their materials and the forces of nature. Any theory that contradicts the cultural data is suspect as it doesn`t correspond to the very thing it is explaining. But, the important part is appreciating that the people back then were people and their stories will be just as nuanced and complex as our own. I am saying this because Dr.Wrangham`s explanation imagines a cookie-cutter scenario with a simple mechanism to organize all of human cultural institutions. It seems very unlikely that a single scenario would repeatedly play out that way but more likely that a variety of developments coalescing over time. That is messy and hard to study, but our history is that way often, our ages and eras bleed into one another and the past reemerges in the present and the present paints how we see the past, and predictions of the future influence the present. We are complex creatures with complicated relations, most of all across the ages.
    1
  397. 1
  398. 1
  399. 1
  400. 1
  401. 1
  402. 1
  403. 1
  404. 1
  405. 1
  406. 1
  407. 1
  408. 1
  409. 1
  410. 1
  411. 1
  412. 1
  413. 1
  414. 1
  415. 1
  416. 1
  417. 1
  418. 1
  419. 1
  420. 1
  421. 1
  422. 1
  423. 1
  424. 1
  425. 1
  426. 1
  427. 1
  428. 1
  429. 1
  430. 1
  431. 1
  432. 1
  433. 1
  434. 1
  435. 1
  436. 1
  437. 1
  438. 1
  439. 1
  440. 1
  441. 1
  442. 1
  443. 1
  444. 1
  445. 1
  446. 1
  447. 1
  448. 1
  449. 1
  450. 1
  451. The whole of rationistic materialism falls apart as we fall apart without meaning and with no Creator there is no explanation for why there is anything at all. Without another layer atop the workd, we are a miserable delusional failure of a species and there is no point in doing science because it is all meaningless and pointless, might as well curl up with some food, get fat and soak up pleasure before the reaper calls you. And it is scientism, naturalistic materialism that creates this and yet it also means our basis for doubting the existence of the spiritual and a Creator cuts off its own roots and kills itself in thr end. But, what happens when you give humanity knowledge of the tides of meaning? Materialism is not the great enemy, it is the antechamber to having only ourselves left as our gods if we do not want the Living God. The terrors when we who know we are not divine toy with the controls at the console of our meaning...when we attempt to make even our own gods to our design. I can not bear to consider it. We will then enslave ourselves to sin anew as our god as of old. Then only those who know Him, can hope to avoid the devastation within and amongst us that follows. Clearly this is not what Dr.Peterson is aiming at, but we would be fools to not consider that there are not those who would use what is being discovered for manipulative ends. Consider the great evil this could potentially lead to to those who rather than accepting the way of things that we are not the highest order would try to manipulate it to their own ends. God have mercy upon us, and save us from ourselves. Through Our Blessed Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. The Divine Wisdom, the Divine Mercy, and Our Just Judge. Amen. Lord Jesus, I trust in You. Amen.
    1
  452. 1
  453. 1
  454. 1
  455. 1
  456. 1
  457. 1
  458. 1
  459. 1
  460. 1
  461. 1
  462. 1
  463. 1
  464. 1
  465. 1
  466. 1
  467. 1
  468. 1
  469. 1
  470. 1
  471. 1
  472. 1
  473. 1
  474. 1
  475. 1
  476. 1
  477. 1
  478. 1
  479. 1
  480. 1
  481. 1
  482. 1
  483. 1
  484. 1
  485. 1
  486. 1
  487. 1
  488. 1
  489. 1
  490. 1
  491. 1
  492. 1
  493. 1
  494. 1
  495. 1
  496. 1
  497. 1
  498. 1
  499. 1
  500. 1
  501. 1
  502. 1
  503. 1
  504. 1
  505. 1
  506. 1
  507. 1
  508. 1
  509. 1
  510. 1
  511. 1
  512. 1
  513. 1
  514. 1
  515. 1
  516. 1
  517. 1
  518. 1
  519. 1
  520. 1
  521. 1
  522. 1
  523. 1
  524. 1