RSA Animate - 21st century enlightenment
Posted Sep 5, 2011, 5:16 AM UTC
425
FYI RSAnimations are based on full length speaches. Here is the speach on which this one was based.
2
Posted Sep 5, 2011, 5:16 AM UTC
FYI RSAnimations are based on full length speaches. Here is the speach on which this one was based.
I see much of the problem as a fundamental paradox within secularism and the effects of post-modern thought. Without the absolute authority of divine revelation to prop up your version of morality, everything is diminished as "just your opinion" in a culture of moral relativism, without the coercive impetus of behaving correctly due to an extrinsic reason, rather than a merely internal sense of virtue and vice. When people realize that there is no divine justice, an ultimate reckoning that metes out fairness, there is little motivation to play by the rules if you are smart/selfish/arrogant enough to get away with it.
The recognition that everything is a matter of perspective and that therefore no one is fit to judge all things promotes a culture that does not allow for the zealous commitment needed to enact change. As Bertrand Russell said, "the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt." Of course, there are plenty of smart people who are domineering enough to be forceful, but that style of leadership seems to prey upon weaker minds and wills, rather than the informed cooperation of equals.
This also brings up the question of the appropriate means used to create a better society. The decline of Enlightenment values can be partially credited to the nightmares that resulted from attempts at utopia. I think the video makes the point that science has no intrinsic leaning toward virtue, evidenced by a history of eugenics, social Darwinism, horrific medical experiments, and so on.
How acceptable is it to use top-down means to achieve your goals? Ideally, it'd be great if we could convince every individual of his or her own accord to agree to play by certain rules, but the reality is that the vast majority of us are ill equipped to make such decisions because our lack of self-awareness. It may be despicable to say, but there is a definite need to coerce and manipulate people into acting well toward each other. However, the potential for the abuse of power in such approaches is also always a lurking threat.
While I agree with video's vague sentiments, it really does very little to flesh out a course of action or even just to plug resources that one can investigate.
Edit: punctuation etc
Not being the person to adequately discuss this with you I'll just say this looks like Illuminati pamphlet about how small group of enlightened thoughtful people—in this case Illuminati bloodlines or whatever you wanna call power elite—can, should and will change the world.
I don't know what to think of this.
His argument could be used as an argument for global enlightenment as well as philosopher kings. I find it undeniable that presently, the vast majority of people, myself included, are ill equipped to make any significant decisions as to how things should be done. Unfortunately, I also find that those who have vested interests in a certain social methodology will also exert large amounts of effort in order to propagate it as well, muddying the waters vastly.
What I find interesting about his post with regards to moral relativism relates to western culture. The framework of interpersonal relations is stripped to a barebones of simple exchanges while human interaction between strangers is nearly completely absent for fear of offending a different culture. I think that the coldness of modern society could possibly be a result of this, as opposed to technology or the spread of suburbs.
[deleted]
It does not; peoples' actions still affect other people. On the contrary you're secular, you (-in principle-) focus on that, whereas attention is divided to religious bullshit instead if you're religious.
Haha not really, that assumes people are that conscious and thoughtful about what they do. (regardless of denomination)They really usually just operate in the moment based on social pressures, internal desires and internal contortions, only sometimes they put their mind to it.
Some religions have social construct where people go to churches and such, atheists have this less, that might be a slight advantage in social activism.
As for the reason peoples sensibilities are eroded, simply because companies are at an advantage for doing it. They do it via marketing, education, putting on a suit and stating very surely that it is so, and generally rubbing it in at every corner of the street. They try convince men they should use parfum fancy body shit,(having pretty much convinced women already) they try make electrical bikes not look lame(if you're <60 and not sick, they are, either way), they try make all sorts of shit 'cool' or 'uncool', like, for instance, having a car.