Best-Of Advice

On the limits of knowledge

Agree or disagree: while organized religious institutions are essentially a “collective mental disorder,” none of us actually KNOW the nature of reality or the reason for consciousness. Life in the universe actually might exist in some sort of spiritual context, and our inability to find “evidence” to prove it could be due to our own lack of physical, mental and/or technological tools that would allow us to do so. I’m not asking whether you agree or disagree with the sentiment itself, ¬†just whether you believe you MIGHT be wrong about everything being meaningless and random?

Okay, you had me right up until the end there. Your problem is that you assume meaninglessness lacks a spiritual context. It doesn’t. Probing the depths of our insignificance can be a very spiritual experience, but as a concept, even spirituality is limited by the scope of the human mind.

I think also you may be saying spiritual when you mean deistic. They’re not interchangeable. If you’re suggesting that there might be a “creator” of the universe, I’m fine with that. We certainly can’t know for sure, and even if there is, that still doesn’t preclude a random universe or provide any inherent reason for consciousness.

If you’re eager for me to say that I might be wrong about the nature of the reality, then sure, I might be wrong.

Of course, my larger point is that it doesn’t matter even if you’re right.


One thought on “On the limits of knowledge

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *