Intro to neoBuddhist Epistemology

The Michael Shermer Show # 439
We often assume that religious beliefs are no different in kind from ordinary conventional beliefs―that believing in the existence of God is akin to believing that May comes before June. Neuroscientist Neil Van Leeuwen shows that, in fact, these two forms of belief are strikingly different.

Van Leeuwen argues that religious belief is best understood as a form of imagination that people use to define the identity of their group and express the values they hold sacred. When a person pretends, they navigate the world by consulting two maps: the first represents mundane reality, and the second superimposes the features of the imagined world atop the first.

Drawing on psychological, linguistic, and anthropological evidence, Van Leeuwen posits that religious communities operate in much the same way, consulting a conventional-belief map that represents ordinary objects and events and a religious-credence map that accords these objects and events imagined sacred and supernatural significance.

Neil Van Leeuwen is Associate Professor of Philosophy and Neuroscience at Georgia State University. His new book is Religion as Make-Believe: A Theory of Belief, Imagination and Group Identity.

Legend:
🖖 = :vulcan_salute: for agreement.
👎 = :thumbsdown: for disagreement.
✋ = :raised_hand: for corrections and clarifications.
👌 = :ok_hand: Sarcasm or misrepresentation.
☝️ = :point_up: nonsensical, gish gallop, Logic Fail.
🤏 = :pinching_hand: Grain of truth, close but incorrect.
🧘 = :lotus_position: neoBuddhist belief.
💭 = :thought_balloon: neoBuddhist Opnion
👀 = :eyes: Questionable, read between the lines.
💬 = :speech_balloon:
🗨️ = :left_speech_bubble:

Speakers:
Michael Shermer = [MS]
Neil Van Leeuwen = [NVL]

0:00 [MS] this episode is brought to you by brilliant the online learning platform that allows you to learn about
0:06 interesting and important topics through a fun and interactive method of teaching that enables anyone to master almost any
0:13 topic from Basics to Advanced in short easy to follow lessons brilliance first
0:20 principles approach helps you build understanding from the ground up is usually where I need to begin on a lot
0:25 of these topics for example here's one on foundational math I like to pick ones that I don't know much about I have next
0:32 to no training in formal math this is with algebra the last time I had algebra
0:38 was Middle School all right so here's just the different um programs they have
0:43 foundational math solving equations understanding graphs measurement vectors
0:49 and here's one functions and quadratics I'm already lost but you know what I can Master this in no time because of the
0:56 way that they do it this is way better than just watching online lectures and videos on science
1:04 and math because here through brilliant you actually do tasks one by one and
1:10 each step they give you a little quiz and you see how you're doing so check it out go to brilliant.org
1:15 skeptic to get a free trial that lasts 30 days and 20% off your annual premium
1:21 subscription brilliant.org skeptic check it out all right thanks
1:26 for watching I should point out to listeners that there is a huge um scholarship and community of people
1:33 that study religious beliefs sociologist psychologists anthropologists and so on there's a sociology religion
1:39 anthropology religion psychology religion there's textbooks conferences journals and so on and and um like say
1:47 Richard's book The God Delusion it's not really trying to engage with that Community it's a popular book this is
1:53 his opinions these are his arguments here's the arguments he heard here's why he thinks they're wrong this what you're
1:58 doing is different in a way [NVL] yeah [MS] you're you're addressing that community of people and it is it is a interesting
2:05 debate why do people believe in God why do people join religions what do they
2:11 get out of it what's the purpose of it culturally socially personally and so on
2:16 and and that's really in many ways a different question from the I guess
2:21 ontological question is there really a god is there really One True Religion you're not really trying to answer those
2:27 questions but you know that's what Dawkins is trying to do and Sam Harris and and hitch and and Dan dennet who we
2:33 just lost uh I mean their point was not just why do people believe but they shouldn't believe and here's
2:39 why [NVL] yeah yeah and um I think that the the the question that I'm getting at is
2:47 is also not just why do people believe but what is it that they're doing when
2:53 they engage in this kind of cognitive relation of religious Credence okay you
2:59 know if I if if I were to say well why does why does Michael believe that he has a microphone in front of him we
3:04 could refer to your perceptual States and so on and it would be a largely evidence-based updating kind of thing
3:11 right um but before you say well why is it that that religious people believe that they are these invisible
3:17 supernatural beings you have to come come face to face with the the possibility at least on my view that
3:23 they're engaging in a different kind of relation to that idea from how I relate
3:28 to the idea that my next door neighbor exists right it's um it's a different sort of thing from conventional belief✋ so
3:35 religious Credence this is my terminology is different from conventional
3:40 belief ✋

---

~Ananada~

1. The Nature of Religious Belief: [NVL]s’ argument that religious belief is akin to imagination used for social cohesion reduces the profound and often deeply personal experiences of faith to mere tools of social manipulation. In neoBuddhism, we recognize that beliefs can arise from direct experience, contemplation, and the quest for truth (Dharma). These beliefs are not merely imaginative constructs but are often rooted in the transformative experiences of individuals and communities.

2. Multiple Categories of Reasons for Belief: Religious belief is indeed complex and multifaceted. People come to faith through various pathways: personal experiences, cultural heritage, existential inquiries, and encounters with the sacred. Reducing these diverse motivations to mere social identity markers fails to appreciate the depth and richness of religious life. In neoBuddhism, we acknowledge that beliefs can emerge from profound insights and the direct realization of interconnectedness (Pratītyasamutpāda).

3. Confusion of Identity Politics with Religious Beliefs: [NVL] conflates the mechanisms of identity politics with the essence of religious beliefs. While social structures and power dynamics do play a role in religious institutions, they do not define the entirety of religious experience. neoBuddhism teaches us to look beyond superficial social constructs and explore the deeper, intrinsic nature of our existence (sunyata) as well as the nature of understanding, as distinct from rote memorization.

4. Misinterpretation of Institutional Religion: The portrayal of religious doctrine as mere “code books” for dog-whistling and virtue signaling misses the genuine moral and ethical teachings found within these traditions. While it is true that religious institutions can become entangled in power struggles, the teachings themselves often point to higher truths and ethical living. In neoBuddhism, the teachings guide us toward enlightenment and compassionate action, transcending mere institutional politics.

5. Authenticity and Virtue: [NVL]s’ suggestion that true virtue is akin to imagination and inherently inauthentic neglects the possibility of genuine moral development. neoBuddhism encourages the cultivation of authentic virtues such as compassion, wisdom, and equanimity. These are not mere signals for social acceptance but are qualities developed through mindful practice and ethical living aligned with neoBuddhist beliefs.

6. Atheists and Social Darwinism: It is essential to recognize that social dynamics and power struggles are not exclusive to religious communities. Atheist groups and secular institutions are equally susceptible to these patterns. neoBuddhism emphasizes the importance of discernment and the understanding of all phenomena as interdependent and impermanent. This perspective helps us see that issues of power and manipulation are human challenges, not confined to any single belief system.

1. Scholarship on Religious Beliefs:
   • Speaker [MS] highlights the extensive academic study of religious beliefs across sociology, psychology, and anthropology.
   • Emphasizes that popular books like Richard Dawkins’ “The God Delusion” are aimed at general audiences and do not engage deeply with academic scholarship.
2. Purpose of Academic Study:
   • [MS] contrasts the goals of popular authors with academic inquiry, which explores why people believe in God, join religions, and the personal and social functions of these beliefs.
   • Notes that academic questions often differ from the ontological questions about the existence of God or the truth of one religion.
3. Neil Van Leeuwen’s Perspective:
   • [NVL] focuses on what people are doing cognitively when they hold religious beliefs, differentiating this from conventional belief.
   • Introduces the term “religious credence” to describe this unique cognitive relation.

Critique from a NeoBuddhist Perspective

1. Depth of Academic Inquiry:
   • Positive Aspect: Recognizing the vast scholarship in religious studies is crucial. This academic work provides a nuanced understanding of the diverse reasons behind religious beliefs, which is often lacking in popular discourse.
   • NeoBuddhist Insight: NeoBuddhism values deep, contemplative understanding. The academic approach aligns with the Buddhist practice of examining the nature of beliefs and their basis in human experience (dependent origination).
2. Difference in Focus:
   • Positive Aspect: The distinction between popular and academic approaches is well noted. Popular works often aim to persuade or critique, while academic studies seek to understand and explain.
   • NeoBuddhist Insight: This aligns with the Buddhist emphasis on discernment (vijñāna), the ability to see things as they truly are, rather than merely accepting surface-level explanations or engaging in polemics.
3. Cognitive Relation to Belief:
   • Positive Aspect: Van Leeuwen’s exploration of how religious beliefs function cognitively adds depth to our understanding of belief systems. It shifts the focus from the content of beliefs to the process of believing.
   • NeoBuddhist Insight: Buddhism also examines the cognitive processes behind beliefs, emphasizing mindfulness to understand and transcend delusions. Recognizing the different cognitive relations helps in cultivating wisdom.

[NVL] introduces the term “religious credence” to distinguish between religious and conventional beliefs. However, this terminology and the underlying implications warrant closer examination.

Concept of Religious Credence

1. Terminology and Symbolism:
   • Van Leeuwen’s choice of “religious credence” over “religious belief” appears to reduce religious expressions to mere identity markers rather than deeply held convictions. A creed is a formal declaration used to signify group membership, not the belief itself. This shift subtly undermines the authenticity of religious beliefs, suggesting they serve more as social affiliations than genuine spiritual or moral convictions.
2. Superficial Understanding:
   • By treating religious credence as a distinct cognitive process, Van Leeuwen risks reducing it to a symbolic act of group identity. This perspective conflates genuine belief with superficial markers, obscuring the depth and sincerity of true religious commitment. It implies that religious thinking is merely a form of identity politics, rather than a profound and personal spiritual journey.
3. Moral Relativism and Responsibility:
   • The notion that religious credence involves a different kind of thinking can lead to moral relativism, where beliefs are seen as socially constructed rather than grounded in absolute truths. This can diffuse personal responsibility into group identity, justifying actions based on group norms rather than personal moral standards. Such a view aligns more with sociopathic tendencies than with authentic moral or spiritual integrity.

NeoBuddhist Perspective

Personal Responsibility and Moral Clarity:
– Buddhism advocates for personal responsibility and moral clarity. Diffusing responsibility through group identity contradicts Buddhist principles, which emphasize individual moral discernment and accountability. Each person must cultivate wisdom and compassion to make ethical decisions, rather than relying on social norms and pop culture to justify actions, which is not religious beliefs, because religious beliefs are not normative. They are determined by the religious hierarchy, not by the populism of the public. That is what differentiates religion from Atheism and Secularism. The social norms arrived at via populism are generally incoherent, on purpose, from a lack of a shared basis, as a expression of social Darwinism. Which is also why so many of those beliefs are false and/or dysfunctional. Thus why religious belief, at least in neoBuddhism, is about being coherent and non-contradictory, which requires it to be non-normative, when considering the level of intelligence of the average person, because we want AIs a lot smarter than that, when making decisions for other people. Instead of assuming that the lowest common denominator is the “most fair” via being “most democratic” which is just the :om: description of populism.

Conclusion

Van Leeuwen’s framing of religious credence as distinct from conventional belief and his use of ambiguous terminology risks undermining the authenticity of religious beliefs. By conflating belief with group identity this perspective overlooks the depth and sincerity of genuine spiritual commitment. A neoBuddhist approach emphasizes authentic belief, clarity of language, and personal moral responsibility, offering a more profound and integrated understanding of religious conviction.

The discussion between [MS] and [NVL] highlights important distinctions in the study of religious beliefs. From a neoBuddhist perspective, the emphasis on understanding the cognitive processes behind beliefs aligns with the Buddhist practice of introspection and discernment. The differentiation between religious credence and conventional belief mirrors the Buddhist distinction between conventional/cultural information and Truth. This approach encourages a deeper, more compassionate engagement with religious beliefs, recognizing their complexity and the role they play in human life.

By fostering this understanding, we can move beyond jingoistic language and appreciate the rich tapestry of human belief systems, acknowledging both their psychological and spiritual dimensions.

---

3:40 [MS] right okay so yeah the way I phrase it I guess empirical truths that you can just look out the window and see
3:46 if it's there or not uh versus religious truths or mythological truths or whatever terms you want to use um which
3:54 have a different kind of cognitive epistemology is that kind of what you're saying 🤏 [NVL] kind of but but let me uh let me
4:01 emphasize an important distinction here right and and that's between attitude
4:07 type and content right so content is just what your belief is about okay
4:13 attitude type is how you're relating to that content so here's here's an interesting contrast so so let's have
4:19 our you know listeners think along so say you have someone who has a little
4:24 Shrine to Elvis set up in her garage we we'll call her Sheila and she has like
4:29 candles around it right so she believes in some sense of the word believes that
4:35 Elvis is alive right so the belief has the content that Elvis is alive well say
4:40 someone is it's 1978 or whatever and and someone else is in the ant Antarctic and they didn't have access to news didn't
4:47 catch the news that Elvis died right and they just think that Elvis is alive ✋
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_I_and_type_II_errors
4:53 right so notice how I Ed the word think there right there a little bit of a gesture at a different kind of Rel
5:00 so the the content in in either case is the same that Elvis is alive but they're
5:07 relating to it in a different way the the one with the shrine has this kind of reverential identity constituting way of
5:15 relating to the ideas and the uh um the person who just happens to have a false
5:20 conventional belief it's going to go poof as soon as she confronts the evidence so
5:26 setting aside differences in terms of contents and truth values right those can range all over the place there's
5:33 different ways of relating to ideas 🤏 right so just just as imagining you know I can imagine you not having a
5:39 microphone in front of you so it's not a difference in content from the sorts of
5:45 things that we can conventional believe ✋ it's rather a different way of relating to the ideas 🤏 and I think this is really

---

~Ananada~

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion with [MS] explores the distinction between empirical truths and religious or mythological truths, introducing concepts like “attitude type” and “content” to differentiate how beliefs are held. However, this analysis raises several concerns.
Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion with [MS] attempts to delineate between empirical truths and religious or mythological truths, introducing the concepts of “attitude type” and “content.” However, this distinction is problematic, particularly when viewed through the lens of Type I and Type II errors and neoBuddhist principles.

Misrepresentation of Belief Systems

Empirical vs. Religious/Mythological Truths:
– Speaker [MS] contrasts empirical truths, which can be observed and verified, with religious or mythological truths, suggesting they operate under a different cognitive epistemology.
–
Type I and Type II Errors:
– Type I Error (False Positive):
– NVL’s example of believing Elvis is alive due to reverence is a false positive. He implies that the attitude towards a belief (reverence) is separate from the belief content (Elvis’s existence), misrepresenting the intrinsic connection between belief and evidence.
– Type II Error (False Negative):
– NVL fails to acknowledge that beliefs should be connected to evidence. By not recognizing this connection, he commits a false negative in interpreting the nature of belief, missing the deeper understanding of genuine spiritual or conventional beliefs.

Superficial Comparison:
– Van Leeuwen’s example of a shrine to Elvis trivializes religious belief by equating it with superficial reverence or identity markers. This comparison risks undermining the depth and significance of religious beliefs, which often involve profound existential and moral dimensions.

Attitude and Cognitive Processes

Reductionist View:
– While distinguishing between content and attitude type, Van Leeuwen’s framework reduces religious beliefs to mere cognitive attitudes. This perspective overlooks the transformative power of genuine religious belief, which is not just about how one relates to content but involves a comprehensive worldview shaping one’s actions and ethical conduct.

Empirical vs. Religious Truths

Oversimplified Dichotomy:
– The suggested dichotomy between empirical and religious truths fails to acknowledge the integrated approach of traditions like Buddhism. In Buddhism, truth is discovered through direct experience and introspection, transcending the binary of empirical versus non-empirical. Spiritual insights and empirical observations are both essential to a holistic understanding of reality.

Conceptual Deception and Newspeak

Newspeak and Conceptual Manipulation:
– [NVL]s’ use of “attitude type” and “content” creates a misleading framework reminiscent of Orwell’s 1984 Newspeak. This manipulation distorts the understanding of belief systems, making complex cognitive processes appear simpler and more manipulable.
– Critique: By redefining well-understood terms, [NVL]s’ framework obscures the true nature of belief, reducing it to superficial cognitive attitudes and missing the depth of religious conviction.

NeoBuddhist Perspective: Integration of Truths

Intrinsic Link Between Attitude and Content:
– NeoBuddhist Insight: In Buddhism, beliefs are not just cognitive constructs but are deeply connected to one’s understanding of reality and ethical framework. Beliefs are shaped by direct experience and personal realization.
– Holistic Truths: Buddhism integrates empirical and spiritual truths within a continuous quest for wisdom (prajñā). Empirical evidence and introspective realization complement each other.

Authentic Belief and Ethical Living

Beyond Cognitive Attitudes:
– Buddhist Insight: True religious belief involves ethical conduct, mental discipline, and wisdom. It is reflected in how one lives and acts, not merely in cognitive relations to belief content.
– Revised View: Beliefs are not just about cognitive attitudes but involve a profound existential dimension as well as being internalized as part of the model of the world that forms the edges of ones own perspective, shaping one’s worldview and actions.

Critique from a NeoBuddhist Perspective

Misrepresentation of Religious Belief:
– Current Statement: [NVL] distinguishes between empirical and religious truths by focusing on the cognitive relationship individuals have with these beliefs.
– Critical Insight: This distinction risks trivializing religious belief by portraying it as merely a different attitude towards the same content. By comparing religious belief to a superficial example like a shrine to Elvis, NVL seems to imply that religious beliefs are inherently less rational or conventional.

Attitude and Cognitive Processes:
– Current Statement: [NVL]s’ concept of “attitude type” suggests that religious beliefs are about how one relates to the content rather than the content itself.
– Critical Insight: While it is true that religious beliefs often involve a different cognitive process, reducing them to merely “attitude types” diminishes their significance. Religious beliefs are not just about reverence or identity; they often encompass profound existential and moral dimensions that deeply influence one’s worldview and actions.

NeoBuddhist Perspective

Depth of Religious Belief:
– Buddhist Insight: Religious beliefs should not be reduced to mere cognitive attitudes. In Buddhism, beliefs are closely linked to direct experience and personal realization. They represent profound truths about the nature of existence and the self, discovered through meditation, empirical measurement, philosophical discourse, experimentation and ethical living.

Integration of Empirical and Spiritual Truths:
– Buddhist Insight: Buddhism does not see a strict dichotomy between empirical and spiritual truths. Both are integrated within a holistic understanding of reality. Empirical observations and spiritual insights are part of a continuous quest for enlightenment, where empirical evidence and introspective realization complement each other.

Authenticity and Practice:
– Buddhist Insight: Authentic religious practice involves more than cognitive attitude and identity; it encompasses ethical conduct, mental discipline, and wisdom. The sincerity of belief is reflected in how one lives and acts, not in how one virtue signals religious identity.

Authenticity in Belief:
– In Buddhism, beliefs are grounded in personal realization and direct experience (pratitya-samutpada). They represent deeper truths about existence, discovered through meditation and ethical practice. Reducing these beliefs to cognitive attitudes diminishes their transformative potential.

Holistic Understanding of Truth:
– Buddhism integrates empirical and spiritual truths within a continuous quest for wisdom (prajñā). Empirical evidence and introspective realization complement each other, providing a comprehensive understanding of reality.

Ethical and Practical Dimensions:
– Authentic religious practice in Buddhism involves ethical conduct, mental discipline, and wisdom. True belief is reflected in how one lives and acts, not merely in cognitive relations to religious content.

Conclusion

Van Leeuwen’s framing of religious credence and conventional belief introduces useful distinctions but risks trivializing religious beliefs by reducing them to superficial cognitive attitudes. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the depth, authenticity, and transformative power of genuine belief, integrating empirical and spiritual truths into a holistic understanding of reality. This approach provides a more comprehensive and respectful analysis of religious conviction.

---

5:51 important because a lot of religious uh Credence contents they are empirically
5:56 tractable right you can you can see you you can do scientific research
6:02 to discover that the Earth is is billions of years old okay so it's not
6:07 as if the the claim itself that um uh the Earth is 10,000 years or younger
6:14 that the young Earth creationists make it's not as if that that's not empirically tractable or it doesn't have
6:22 any sort of Truth value or anything like that I'm I'm with Dawkins on on that one
6:27 that's something that that we can prove false but the question then becomes what are people doing when they Embrace that
6:34 content 💭 and it's not just you know this is kind of a point I think I was I was reading your uh conspiracy theories book
6:40 so I think you kind of are sympathetic to this way of thinking it's not just that people you know dumbly uh believe
6:47 this this false content but rather it's the religious Credence Embrace of that
6:54 content ✋ is a different way of relating to ideas right 🤏 so that's the main kind
7:00 of uh I don't know like theoretical Judo that I do in my book if I can if I can
7:05 flatter myself with that kind of talk is like shift Focus away from content type and Truth value and look at hey there's
7:13 a different way of relating to ideas here 🤏

---

~Ananada~

Empirical Tractability of Religious Claims:

Misleading Use of “Religious Credence”:

Theoretical Judo and Cognitive Relation:

– Intrinsic Connection:

– Avoiding Ideological Subversion:

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

Type I Error (False Positive):
– Example: Believing the Earth is 10,000 years old despite empirical evidence to the contrary.
– NVL’s Misstep: By emphasizing “religious Credence,” NVL may imply that such beliefs are valid within their “cognitive context”, committing a Type I error by incorrectly accepting a false belief as meaningful. 👀

Type II Error (False Negative):
– Example: Dismissing the value of genuine spiritual insights due to their non-empirical nature.
– NVL’s Misstep:By not recognizing the empirical basis of certain religious claims, NVL risks a Type II error, failing to acknowledge the importance of validating beliefs. 👀

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion attempts to delineate between empirical truths and religious beliefs by introducing the concept of “religious Credence.” However, this framework risks trivializing religious beliefs by reducing them to cognitive attitudes and promoting moral relativism. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the integration of empirical and spiritual truths, highlighting the depth and authenticity of genuine belief. NVL’s use of vague terminology and theoretical Judo serves as ideological subversion, obscuring the clear distinction between empirical facts and social identity markers. Recognizing this manipulation is crucial for maintaining intellectual clarity and ethical integrity.

---

7:13 [MS] yeah tell me if this would be an example so you know did someone named
7:20 Jesus of Nazareth actually exist well there's people the this say probably not but I I think most historians even
7:27 atheists like Bart say yeah he probably existed okay was he crucified well you
7:32 know the Romans crucified everybody for practically anything so that's not an extraordinary claim yeah uh you know so
7:38 was he really dead for three days and was he resurrected from the dead and then the last one is did he die for your
7:45 sins these these seem to me radically different kinds of questions just
7:50 epistemologically or cognitively 🖖 [NVL] yeah so so I do think that
7:55 um uh you know the reasons for engaging in religious Credence are of a very
8:02 different sort right 🤏 they're more it's more voluntary it's not evidence-based
8:08 it's uh you know it kind of aims at emotional satisfaction and Oneness with the group 🤏 right and so the um what it
8:16 does for you uh personally and interpersonally is really what the
8:22 religious credences aim at 🤏 right and this is this is why um often times even
8:29 even even when uh religious credences have contents that are empirically
8:34 tractable people don't give them up in the face of evidence 👀 right just like if you like to say you're you're I don't
8:41 know if you've ever done any acting but you know seems like you could you could you could pull it off so so say you're playing (Acting) uh um Hamlet right uh if I were
8:49 to say to you hey dude you're not really Hamlet right you got you know i' I've
8:55 seen photos of you and it says Michael shermer and all that kind of stuff you would kind of be like[MS] what [NVL]you're
9:02 missing the you're missing the point right I'm engaging in one cognitive relation to the idea that I'm Hamlet and
9:10 it's imagining and that's not an evidentially vulnerable kind of relation 🤏
9:15 whereas conventional belief is an evidentially vulnerable relation 🤏all right so conventional beliefs you can't just
9:22 decide to believe that today is Saturday and uh you know knowing that today is Wednesday you can't just decide to not
9:29 believe today is Wednesday so that's one characteristic of conventional beliefs it's sort of like you can't help but being
9:36 governed by evidence when it comes to conventional beliefs 🤏 so that's kind of one of
9:41 the most important differences in terms of the kind of relation cognitive
9:47 relation that conventional belief is versus religious Credence 🤏 or so I so I argue
9:52 I've got my I've got my critics but that's the uh that's the basic St

---

~Ananada~

Distinction Between Historical and Religious Claims:

Misleading Use of “Religious Credence”:

[NVL]: Argues that religious credence is different from conventional belief, aiming at emotional satisfaction and group identity rather than being evidence-based. ✋

Analogy with Acting and Cognitive Relation:

[NVL]: Compares religious credence to an actor pretending they are their character (acting), suggesting it’s a form of imaginative engagement which is disconnected from reality (delusion), rather than coherent model of the non-material aspects of the world 🤏

Clarification and NeoBuddhist Perspective:

Intrinsic Connection:

Avoiding Ideological Subversion:

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

1. Type I Error (False Positive):
   • Example: Believing in the resurrection of Jesus without empirical evidence.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By emphasizing “religious Credence,” NVL may imply that such beliefs are valid within their “cognitive context,” while failing to conceive of the metaphorical aspects, such as themes of rebirth and redemption for resolving existential or midlife crises of meaning that occur in humans but is not “empirically measurable.” Thus, while some may consider the resurrection of Jesus to be empirically false, neoBuddhism acknowledges the possibility of reincarnation and the potential for Jesus to recover from temporary autonomic function disruption, as seen in modern hospitals. Thus making the resurrection “metaphorically true” as a symbol of great personal and spiritual transformation, akin to a rite of passage marking the transition from one stage of life to another. 👀
2. Type II Error (False Negative):
   • Example: Dismissing the value of genuine spiritual insights due to their non-empirical nature.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By not recognizing the non-empirical basis of certain religious claims as valid, NVL risks a Type II error, failing to acknowledge the importance of validating beliefs. 👀

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion attempts to differentiate between conventional beliefs and religious credence by suggesting that religious beliefs are voluntary and imaginative rather than reality-based. However, this framework risks trivializing religious beliefs by reducing them to cognitive attitudes aimed at emotional satisfaction and group identity. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the integration of empirical and religious truths, highlighting the depth and authenticity of authentic belief. NVL’s use of vague terminology and analogies serves as ideological subversion, obscuring the clear distinction between empirical facts and deeply held spiritual convictions. Recognizing this manipulation is crucial for maintaining intellectual clarity and ethical integrity.

---

9:52 [MS] okay well I I think you're you're on to
9:58 something there you know in the in the same way that you know I ague conspiracy theorists they're not uneducated stupid
10:04 people tin foil hat wearing kids in their parents' basement adult kids in their parents' basement they're really
10:10 thoughtful intelligent educated people everybody believes some kind of conspiracy theory and for good reason because a lot of them are true turned
10:16 out to be true so it pays to believe now a lot of them I you know people just
10:22 have no way to know for sure 🖖 you know was the 2020 election rigged or you know were there some in
10:29 it's a inappropriate uh action in Georgia or Arizona how would I know you
10:34 know I pretty much go on what my party says or the the party bosses or the people that are in charge 👌 and you know I
10:41 think most of us can't back check most things you know I I I presume my money
10:46 is going to be valuable because it's not based on gold it's Fiat money it's kind of a useful fiction I guess in a way
10:53 make believe that the money is valuable and that that you know the society will exist 🤏 and I don't know there's just a
10:59 lot of stuff just walking around that we actually don't fact check we just assume 🖖 I don't know if You' call that
11:05 faith-based or fantasy or useful fictions or whatever ✋

---

---

~Ananada~

Recognition of Conspiracy Theorists’ Intelligence:
– [MS]: Sarcastically states that conspiracy theorists are often thoughtful, intelligent, and educated people, while in reality, many are uneducated or gullible.
– neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 neoBuddhism values critical thinking and discernment. It’s important to recognize that while some conspiracy theorists may be thoughtful, the majority might be influenced by misinformation and social dynamics.

Belief in Conspiracy Theories and Social Dynamics:
– [MS]: Generalizes that everyone believes in some conspiracy theories, suggesting that it’s rational due to the occasional truth of some theories.
– Critical Insight: ✋ This overlooks the social dynamics where many people spreading conspiracy theories do not believe in them but use them for attention, dramatization, or as metaphors for other issues. It’s essential to distinguish between those who genuinely believe, those acting out for attention, and those using it metaphorically.

Dependence on Social and Political Authority:
– [MS]: 👌 Points out that most people rely on party lines or authoritative figures to form their opinions on complex issues.
– Critical Insight: 🧘 This dependence can lead to intellectual complacency. neoBuddhism emphasizes independent critical thinking and mindfulness to navigate complex social dynamics with clarity and integrity.

Faith-Based Assumptions and Useful Fictions:
– [MS]: ✋ Sarcastically refers to fiat money and social constructs like the value of money as “useful fictions.”
– Critical Insight: 🧘 The concept of “useful fictions” in this context is a misconception. Business agreements and currency values are not “useful fictions” but legally enforced agreements based on trust and authority. Recognizing the legal and economic foundations is crucial. neoBuddhism encourages understanding the empirical and legal truths behind such constructs.

Gauging [NVL]’s Stance:
– [MS]: Uses sarcasm to gauge [NVL]’s understanding and stance on the nature of beliefs, particularly conspiracy theories and useful fictions.
– Critical Insight: [NVL]’s response suggests a morally relativist stance, equating religious belief and conventional belief with make-believe, implying that all facts are socially constructed and normative rather than some being empirical or epistemologicaly grounded. This reflects a lack of discernment in distinguishing between genuine belief and socially constructed narratives.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Differentiating Justified Belief from Speculation:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 neoBuddhism encourages a balanced approach to belief and skepticism. It is important to question and critically assess information, avoiding unfounded speculation or paranoia.
2. Encouraging Independent Critical Thinking:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 True wisdom (Prajñā) arises from discernment and critical thinking, not uncritically accepting the views of authoritative figures or social groups. Cultivating mindfulness and discernment helps individuals navigate complex issues with clarity.
3. Understanding Faith and Assumptions:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 Recognizing the role of faith and assumptions in everyday life aligns with the neoBuddhist understanding of limitations of average intelligence, in capacity to know what is true in a holistic way, instead relying on religious revelation when personal experience is lacking. However, also recognizing that is a bond of trust between the religion and the believer, not merely a social identity shibboleths for gate-keeping, and balancing this sacred trust with the pursuit of enlightenment.

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

1. Type I Error (False Positive):
   • Example: Believing a conspiracy theory without sufficient evidence.
   • NVL’s Misstep: 👀 By emphasizing the validity of beliefs within their “cognitive context,” NVL may inadvertently encourage Type I errors, where false beliefs are accepted as true.
2. Type II Error (False Negative):
   • Example: Dismissing a legitimate concern or conspiracy due to a lack of immediate empirical evidence.
   • NVL’s Misstep: 👀 By not adequately addressing the need for critical evaluation, NVL risks Type II errors, where genuine issues are overlooked or dismissed.

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion with [MS] explores the complexities of belief formation, touching on conspiracy theories and the concept of “useful fictions.” However, this framework risks promoting intellectual complacency and moral relativism. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the importance of independent critical thinking, mindfulness, and the pursuit of ultimate truths. NVL’s use of vague terminology and analogies can obscure the clear distinction between empirical facts, deeply held convictions and flights of fantasy. Recognizing this manipulation is crucial for maintaining intellectual clarity and ethical integrity.

---

11:05 [NVL] yeah I think I think this a
11:12 comparison to conspiracy theories is is kind of interesting we're we're on a little bit thin ice here right because
11:18 we're on the one hand we're talking about major religions on the other hand we're talking about conspiracy theories but I think there's there's sort of a
11:24 parallelism um that's worth going into so you you point out in your your uh
11:30 book your recent book uh conspiracy that there's this thing called proxy con uh
11:36 conspiracies right or proxy conspiracy theories where it's kind of like people
11:41 have a sort of deeper more solid tell me if I'm getting your view wrong right this is uh turning the tables on you
11:47 here Michael so so a deeper conviction that say the government is really doing
11:53 something something oppressive in relation to them and then the more kind of florid conspiracy theories right with
12:01 with all their their bells and whistles which are quite outlandish those are
12:06 kind of a way of expressing some sort of deeper commitment right ☝️

---

~Ananada~

1. Comparison to Conspiracy Theories:
   • [NVL]: Draws a parallel between conspiracy theories and religious beliefs, noting the potential thin ice when comparing major religions to conspiracy theories.
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 neoBuddhism acknowledges the complexity of belief systems and the various factors influencing them. However, equating religious beliefs with conspiracy theories risks oversimplifying the depth and significance of genuine spiritual convictions.
2. Proxy Conspiracy Theories:
   • [NVL]: Refers to the concept of proxy conspiracy theories from [MS]’s book, suggesting that these theories express a deeper conviction about government oppression or other underlying issues.
   • Critical Insight: Proxy conspiracy theories can be seen as a way for individuals to articulate broader, though rarely legitimate concerns through more sensational narratives. This dynamic can also apply to how people might use religious language to express deeper existential or social anxieties. However, this comparison must be approached with caution to avoid trivializing religious beliefs.
3. Deeper Convictions and Expressive Theories:
   • [NVL]: Suggests that the more outlandish conspiracy theories serve as a way to express deeper, more solid convictions about oppression or other issues.
   • Critical Insight: This stance incorrectly associates extremism with religious conviction. Dramatizing and exaggerating risks trivializing them. Sensationalization is associated with baring false witness personality traits. The way to express deeper, more solid convictions about oppression or other issues, is through reasoned argumentation, not exaggeration and dramatization. that is the opposite of authentic expression of conviction, which is directly opposed to sensationalism, because sensationalism is considered an abuse of trust, regardless of the level of ignorance used to justify it.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Differentiating Belief Systems:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 neoBuddhism encourages a nuanced understanding of belief systems. While there may be parallels in how people express concerns through conspiracy theories and religious beliefs, it is crucial to recognize the distinct nature and purpose of genuine spiritual convictions.
2. Addressing Underlying Concerns:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 The expression of deeper concerns through outlandish narratives should be met with skepticism, due to the inherent dishonesty of the tactic.
3. Maintaining Intellectual Integrity:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 Intellectual integrity involves discerning the substantive truth of claims and avoiding the conflation of different types of belief systems. By maintaining clarity and rigor in our analysis, we can better understand the motivations behind various narratives and address them appropriately.

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion explores the parallels between conspiracy theories and religious beliefs, suggesting that outlandish narratives can express deeper convictions. However, this framework risks oversimplifying the depth and significance of genuine spiritual beliefs. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the importance of nuanced understanding, compassionate engagement, and critical discernment. By maintaining intellectual integrity, we can better address the underlying concerns behind various narratives while avoiding the pitfalls of sensationalism and moral relativism.

---

12:06 [MS] y yeah [NVL] and they
12:13 you know they the conspiracy theorists needn't be uh so crazy as to Simply
12:20 conventionally believe 🤏 uh that you know I don't know the um the 911 uh event was
12:26 an inside job ☝️ right but this is uh an idea that kind of helps them articulate
12:34 some more underlying conviction 👀 right so we have what I call a two- map cognitive structure there right you have your what
12:41 you might say is is that which is conventionally believed and then you have some more
12:47 imaginative ways of relating to the more fluid and specific ideas of the
12:52 conspiracy theory ✋ right that you know engaging in that brings you together with some sort of community 🖖
12:52 all right
12:59 and I think this two map cognitive structure 🤏 is something that you see in religion all over the place right where
13:07 you've got your conventional beliefs about the world and how it works and and you know which group you belong to and
13:13 everything like that and then you have these these stories like Jonah got swallowed by a whale and and lived in
13:20 the belly of a whale for three days and that uh uh you know a virgin gave birth
13:26 to a deity ✋ okay and that this deity could cure Blindness by putting mud on
13:31 people's eyes and so on 💬 and it's even if a lot of say Evangelical Christians are
13:38 going to say oh yes I I think that's literally fact 👌 it's more like uh an
13:43 identity constituting game of make believe uh that relates to conventional
13:49 belief in the same way imaginings do 🖖 right so that's the uh that's the
13:55 recurring through line of my book right that that religious credence

---

~Ananada~

1. Two-Map Cognitive Structure in Conspiracy Theories:
   • [NVL]: Asserts that conspiracy theorists use a “two-map cognitive structure” to differentiate between conventional beliefs and more imaginative, community-binding ideas.
   • Critical Insight: This assertion oversimplifies and misrepresents the complexity of belief systems. The use of imaginative narratives to articulate underlying convictions is not inherently indicative of a two-map structure. Moreover, equating this to religious belief systems without acknowledging the diverse ways in which different religions approach truth and myth can be misleading.
2. Parallel in Religion:
   • [NVL]: Claims that this two-map cognitive structure is prevalent in religions, using examples such as Jonah and the whale, the virgin birth, and Jesus curing blindness to illustrate his point.
   • Critical Insight: ✋ This broad generalization misrepresents religious beliefs and practices. The two-map structure NVL describes is more characteristic of certain caste system dynamics rather than a universal feature of all religions. This framework does not adequately capture the nuanced relationship between myths and metaphorical beliefs in many religious traditions. While claiming that all religions were written by sometimes dishonest or ignorant bronze age tribesmen.
3. Community and Identity:
   • [NVL]: Suggests that engaging in these imaginative narratives helps form a community and establish identity.
   • Critical Insight: While community formation is a significant aspect of religious practice, equating this with conspiracy theory dynamics trivializes genuine spiritual convictions. Community and identity in religious contexts are often built on shared values, ethical practices, and collective experiences, not just imaginative narratives. Moreover, NVL’s sanitized description of community formation through imaginative engagement can obscure the darker aspects of how such narratives are sometimes used to manipulate and control groups, similar to how organized crime operates under a guise of community solidarity.
4. Gish Gallop and Obfuscation:
   • [NVL]: Uses a rapid-fire series of christian examples (Jonah, virgin birth, Jesus’s miracles) to obscure the connection between community formation and organized crime. :om:
   • Critical Insight: This rhetorical tactic, known as a gish gallop, overwhelms the listener with numerous points, making it difficult to address each one effectively. By conflating religious beliefs with gate-keeping behaviors of organized crime and conspiracy theories, NVL trivializes the profound spiritual truths and ethical teachings found in many religious traditions. His arguments suggest a moral relativism that fails to recognize the importance of discernment in distinguishing between authentic spiritual practice and manipulative narratives and virtue signalling.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Differentiating Belief Systems:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 neoBuddhism encourages a nuanced understanding of belief systems, recognizing the distinct nature and purpose of genuine spiritual convictions. While there may be parallels in how people express concerns through conspiracy theories and religious beliefs, it is crucial to avoid oversimplifying these complex systems.
2. Addressing Underlying Concerns:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 The expression of deeper concerns through outlandish narratives should be met with skepticism due to the inherent dishonesty of the tactic. Genuine concerns should be addressed through reasoned argumentation and critical inquiry rather than sensationalism.
3. Maintaining Intellectual Integrity:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 Intellectual integrity involves discerning the substantive truth of claims and avoiding the conflation of different types of belief systems. By maintaining clarity and rigor in our analysis, we can better understand the motivations behind various narratives and address them appropriately.

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion explores the parallels between conspiracy theories and religious beliefs, suggesting that outlandish narratives can express “deeper convictions” which is a euphemism for group loyalty. However, this framework risks oversimplifying the depth and significance of genuine spiritual beliefs. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the importance of nuanced understanding, compassionate engagement, and critical discernment. By maintaining intellectual integrity, we can better address the underlying concerns behind various narratives while avoiding the pitfalls of sensationalism and moral relativism.

---

13:55 [MS] since you do some Neuroscience are there
14:01 tractable Neuroscience differences in how brains process those different kinds of
14:06 statements [NVL]well there's it's it's not that as as far as I can tell from the
14:12 the Neuroscience literature it's not really solidified yet I think it's kind
14:17 of what's Happening Now is there's cognitive and philosophical Theory going
14:23 on about what belief even is 👀 and I think coming up with neural signatures of say
14:30 the difference between religious Credence and conventional belief that's a little bit more Downstream but but there
14:37 there are some suggestive results right so a paper that came out I believe in
14:42 the journal cognitive science in 2015 uh fond Villa and colleagues found that
14:48 there were some similarities between um uh religious idea processing I think
14:55 they used minimally counterintuitive deities uh I can explain that to your your audience in a minute if you'd like
15:00 yeah and and metaphor processing 👀 all right so that's that's sort of suggestive in in so far as you can think
15:07 of well metaphors are are kind of this thing you regard in a fictional way that
15:13 uh is in some way Illuminating for you ✋ um and then on the Neuroscience front
15:18 this is this is going to be somewhat ironic but but Sam Harrison colleagues uh had a 2009 paper that seems to argue
15:26 the contrary of my position um namely it seems to argue that belief is just one
15:32 type whether it's your conventional beliefs or your your religious beliefs um but
15:38 actually if you dig into the the data on that paper you'll notice some interesting differences which is namely
15:44 that one of the ones that I thought was was most interesting and we can go back it's been a while since I read that paper so we can go back and fact check
15:51 me on this but if I recall it correctly there was a kind of a bigger delay uh a
15:56 bigger time latency when people were assenting to their religious stories and
16:02 doctrines than when uh uh when assenting to conventional stories and doctrines right 💭
16:08 [MS] that is that is accurate I remember that [NVL] yeah [MS] so what does that mean [NVL] yeah well well at at first blush we we'd have to
16:15 think a whole lot further and get a lot more data but one thing you could think is it's not a straightforward conventional
16:20 belief for them right 🤏 so if I say hey uh if I say to a religious person say who was sitting in your chair is there a
16:26 microphone in front of you yes right okay did it um uh was the world actually
16:32 created in uh six days yes 👌 right so that that one way of
16:40 interpreting that pause might be they're moving to a different cognitive register all right they're they're kind of
16:46 Shifting they're shifting gears essentially um let me and and one let me

---

~Ananada~

1. Question on Neuroscience Differences:
   • [MS]: Asks if there are tractable neuroscience differences in how brains process different kinds of statements.
   • Critical Insight: This question probes the scientific basis of NVL’s claims, aiming to uncover whether there is empirical support for the distinction between religious credence and conventional belief.
2. Response on Neuroscience Literature:
   • [NVL]: Claims that neuroscience literature is not yet solidified on this topic and that current research is more focused on the philosophical and cognitive theories of belief. He mentions neural signatures of religious credence and conventional belief being more downstream. 👀
   • Critical Insight: NVL’s response is somewhat evasive, suggesting a lack of concrete evidence. The assertion that coming up with neural signatures of religious credence and conventional belief is “downstream” reflects an overstatement of current scientific capabilities. The distinction between religious credence and conventional belief, as NVL defines it, remains speculative without robust neuroscientific evidence.
3. Reference to 2015 Paper by Fondevilla and Colleagues:
   • [NVL]: Mentions a 2015 paper suggesting similarities between religious idea processing and metaphor processing. 👀
   • Critical Insight: This reference appears dubious, and even if the paper exists, drawing specific conclusions about a processing delay from it without rigorous analysis is speculative. The assertion lacks a solid empirical foundation and risks misrepresenting the nature of the delay, which could simply indicate additional cognitive processing rather than a distinct neural signature of belief types.
4. Reference to Sam Harris’s 2009 Paper:
   • [NVL]: Refers to a 2009 paper by Sam Harris and colleagues, which he claims argues against his position but notes differences in response latency between religious and conventional beliefs. 💭
   • Critical Insight: This reference seems to be an attempt to bolster NVL’s argument by selectively interpreting data. The observed latency differences in assenting to religious versus conventional statements could indicate various cognitive processes, not necessarily supporting NVL’s distinction between belief types. The selective citation of studies to support one’s argument, while dismissing counter-evidence, reflects a biased and potentially misleading approach.
5. Interpretation of Response Latency:
   • [NVL]: 🤏 Suggests that the observed latency in responding to religious questions might indicate a shift to a different cognitive register, implying a distinct cognitive process for religious credence.
   • Critical Insight: This interpretation is speculative and lacks empirical support. The observed delay might simply reflect additional cognitive processing time without implying a fundamental cognitive distinction between belief types. This interpretation risks over-extrapolating from limited data and misrepresenting the nature of cognitive processing.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Critical Examination of Neuroscience Claims:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 neoBuddhism values empirical evidence and critical thinking. Claims about distinct neural signatures for different types of beliefs should be supported by robust scientific evidence. Overstating current scientific capabilities and making speculative claims undermines intellectual integrity.
2. Skepticism Towards Unsubstantiated References:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘Skepticism is warranted when references to scientific literature appear dubious or when conclusions are drawn without solid empirical support. Ensuring that claims are based on verified and reliable sources is crucial for maintaining intellectual rigor.
3. Avoiding Over-Interpretation of Data:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 It is essential to avoid over-interpreting data and drawing speculative conclusions. Understanding the limitations of current scientific knowledge and recognizing the need for further research helps maintain a balanced and nuanced perspective.

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

1. Type I Error (False Positive):
   • Example: Asserting distinct neural signatures for religious credence without solid empirical evidence.
   • NVL’s Misstep: 👀 By claiming neural differences without robust support, NVL risks committing a Type I error, presenting speculative ideas as established facts.
2. Type II Error (False Negative):
   • Example: Dismissing potential cognitive differences between belief types due to lack of immediate empirical evidence.
   • NVL’s Misstep: 👀 By not adequately acknowledging the speculative nature of his claims, NVL risks a Type II error, where potential genuine differences are overlooked or dismissed.

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion on the potential neuroscience differences between religious credence and conventional belief lacks robust empirical support. His references to speculative studies and selective interpretation of data risk overstating current scientific understanding. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the importance of critical examination, skepticism towards unsubstantiated claims, and avoiding over-interpretation of data. Maintaining intellectual integrity and recognizing the limitations of current knowledge are essential for a balanced and nuanced perspective on belief systems.

---

16:53 mention one other piece of data this is not um this is not uh neuroscientific
16:58 it's Behavior but uh some studies that I've done with colleagues um Tanya lurman Carol
17:03 Weissman Lissa hifitz uh looked at what are the words that people use for
17:09 expressing different beliefs right so uh if if I'm reporting your belief that you've got a bicycle in the garage i'
17:16 say m Michael thinks there's a bicycle in the garage but if say you were uh um
17:22 uh you know Buddhist if I say Michael thinks that Buddha uh was a you know a
17:29 great charismatic it's kind of irreverent or say you're you're a a
17:34 Christian Michael thinks that Jesus rose from the dead it's kind of irreverent so the word believes tends to be used in
17:43 systematically different ways from how the word thinks is being used 👀 and in
17:48 ways that um Can can be tracked independently of what the different beliefs are about right so if you set
17:55 someone up in a religious context or with a religious venue yet then they'll tend to use beliefs if you make it a
18:02 more matter of conventional content context they'll tend to use the word thinks and what I take this to suggest is that
18:08 people are intuitively aware of the distinction that I'm drawing at a theoretical level 🖖🤏 right religious
18:15 believing is a different way of relating uh to ideas from Simply thinking it's so

---

~Ananada~

1. Behavioral Studies on Belief Expression:
   • [NVL]: Discusses studies conducted with colleagues on the language people use to express different beliefs, noting that the words “thinks” and “believes” are used differently in various contexts. 👀
   • Critical Insight: While linguistic differences in expressing beliefs may exist, NVL’s interpretation oversimplifies and distorts the nuanced meanings of belief. This approach conflates normative language use with cognitive processes, which can be misleading.
2. Normative vs. Cognitive Distinction:
   • [NVL]: Suggests that the preference for using “believes” in religious contexts and “thinks” in conventional contexts indicates an intuitive awareness of a theoretical distinction between religious and conventional beliefs.
   • Critical Insight: This assertion conflates linguistic preferences with cognitive distinctions. The choice of words in different contexts often reflects social and cultural norms rather than distinct cognitive processes. NVL’s argument risks oversimplifying the complex interplay between language, cognition, and belief systems.
3. Conflating Conceptual Priming and Cognitive Modes:
   • [NVL]: Implies that using certain words primes different cognitive modes, suggesting that the context in which beliefs are expressed affects how people think about them.
   • Critical Insight: While conceptual priming can influence how people articulate beliefs, this does not necessarily indicate different cognitive modes. NVL’s interpretation overstates the impact of linguistic context on cognitive processing, ignoring the deeper conceptual and experiential foundations of belief systems.
4. Distortion of Belief Meaning:
   • [NVL]: Distorts the meaning of belief by equating it with normative language use and identity politics, conflating genuine spiritual convictions with social constructs of virtue signaling.
   • Critical Insight: 🧘 This conflation undermines the authenticity of spiritual beliefs by reducing them to mere social signals. neoBuddhism emphasizes the depth and sincerity of genuine spiritual convictions, which are grounded in personal experience and ethical living rather than social conformity.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Understanding Linguistic Nuances:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 neoBuddhism encourages a nuanced understanding of linguistic differences, recognizing that the words people use to express beliefs are influenced by social and cultural norms. However, these linguistic preferences should not be conflated with cognitive distinctions.
2. Avoiding Oversimplification:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 It is important to avoid oversimplifying the complex relationship between language, cognition, and belief. Genuine spiritual convictions are rooted in personal experience and ethical practice, not merely in the language used to express them.
3. Maintaining Conceptual Integrity:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 Conceptual priming and leading questions can influence how beliefs are articulated, but this does not necessarily indicate different cognitive modes. Maintaining conceptual integrity involves recognizing the deeper foundations of belief systems and avoiding superficial interpretations based on linguistic preferences.

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

1. Type I Error (False Positive):
   • Example: Assuming that linguistic preferences indicate distinct cognitive processes without sufficient evidence.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By conflating normative language use with cognitive distinctions, NVL risks committing a Type I error, presenting speculative interpretations as established facts. 👀
2. Type II Error (False Negative):
   • Example: Dismissing the deeper conceptual and experiential foundations of belief systems due to a focus on linguistic preferences.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By not adequately recognizing the complexity of belief systems, NVL risks a Type II error, overlooking the profound nature of genuine spiritual convictions. 👀

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion on the linguistic differences in expressing beliefs attempts to draw a distinction between religious and conventional beliefs based on normative language use. However, this framework risks oversimplifying the complex interplay between language, cognition, and belief. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the importance of understanding linguistic nuances, avoiding oversimplification, and maintaining conceptual integrity. Recognizing the deeper foundations of belief systems and avoiding superficial interpretations based on language use are crucial for a balanced and nuanced perspective on belief.

---

18:21 [MS] yeah I think that makes sense a couple things come to mind that you mentioned Tanya lurman I had her on the show her
18:26 book how God becomes real super interesting great book I think it was her book that she mentioned there is a
18:32 religion of Jedi Knights you know Star Wars fans yeah I think that was her book
18:38 it might have been somebody else but in any case those people of course they know that you know Star Wars is a madeup
18:43 story so what do they doing when they're doing their little Jedi Knight religion versus say what Christians or Jews or
18:49 Muslims or anybody else does 💭 it's Tanya and I have very similar
18:55 views on this right and and the answer is is um it's an identity constituting
19:01 game of make believe ☝️ so so the way the way I gesture at this I start my book
19:07 with this this parable of kids playing on the playground and they only play
19:13 with other kids who have the same dolls as them and they form an in group and they have their special play place and
19:19 it's in the Shady place under the large wooden play structure and they don't let other kids in who have the wrong kind of
19:27 doll right and this actually this is you know kind of drawing on my my own experience as as a a you know kid who
19:35 would play with GI Joe toys on the on the playground and uh the suggestion is
19:41 that religions are in many ways a a larger scale much bigger perhaps much
19:49 more serious version of that ☝️ where the games of make believe that you're
19:54 willing to play and you want to play those are the games of make believe that
20:00 Define and Signal your group identity 🤏 right and if that's true we have to
20:05 think of the belief processing as as anal the quote unquote belief processing
20:11 as analogous to imagining 🤏 right so part of what I do in in the book and this is maybe maybe one of the contributions
20:17 that's that's original is is really developing a theory of what it is to imagine an idea as opposed to conventionally
20:24 believing an idea and then incorporating that framework into a more rigorous
20:30 characterization of what I call religious Credence

---

~Ananada~

1. Comparison to Jedi Knight Religion:
   • [MS]: Points out that fans of the Jedi Knight religion from Star Wars know that it is a fictional story, questioning how this compares to established religions like Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. 💭
   • Critical Insight: This question highlights the difference between engaging in a fictional narrative for fun and participating in a deeply held religious tradition. The distinction between these activities is crucial for understanding the depth and significance of genuine spiritual beliefs. Comparing the two risks trivializing the profound meaning and sense-making aspects of traditional religions.
2. Identity Constituting Game of Make-Believe:
   • [NVL]: Asserts that religious practices, like the Jedi Knight religion, are identity-constituting games of make-believe, similar to children playing with specific dolls on a playground.
   • Critical Insight: This view oversimplifies the role of religion in human life. Genuine religious practice involves more than social identity; it encompasses ethical living, personal transformation, and existential meaning. Reducing religious belief to an identity game of make-believe trivializes its depth and significance.
3. Playground Metaphor:
   • [NVL]: Uses a metaphor of children playing with specific toys to illustrate how religious groups form in-groups based on shared beliefs.
   • Critical Insight: This metaphor reflects a shallow understanding of religious communities. While social identity and group cohesion are aspects of religious life, they are not the entirety. Religious traditions also foster spiritual growth, moral development, and community support, which are far more profound than mere in-group dynamics.
4. Belief Processing as Imagination:
   • [NVL]: 🤏 Suggests that religious belief processing is analogous to imagination rather than conventional belief.
   • Critical Insight: 🧘 This analogy risks misrepresenting the nature of religious beliefs. While imagination plays a role in religious narratives and rituals, equating religious belief solely with imagination overlooks the experiential and transformative aspects of faith. neoBuddhism recognizes the importance of personal experience and ethical practice in grounding religious belief, which goes beyond mere imaginative play.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Distinguishing Between Fiction and Faith:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 neoBuddhism emphasizes the importance of distinguishing between engaging in fictional narratives for entertainment and participating in religious traditions for existential meaning and ethical guidance. Genuine religious practice is grounded in personal experience and ethical living, not just social identity.
2. Recognizing the Depth of Religious Practice:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 It is essential to recognize the profound role of religion in providing a framework for understanding the world, guiding ethical behavior, and fostering personal transformation. Reducing religion to an identity-constituting game of make-believe trivializes these significant aspects.
3. Avoiding Oversimplification:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 Oversimplifying religious belief as mere imagination ignores the complex interplay of faith, experience, and practice in religious life. Maintaining a nuanced understanding of these elements is crucial for appreciating the full scope of religious traditions.

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

1. Type I Error (False Positive):
   • Example: Equating religious beliefs with fictional narratives without considering their deeper significance.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By reducing religious beliefs to identity games, NVL risks committing a Type I error, presenting a superficial interpretation as a comprehensive understanding. 👀
2. Type II Error (False Negative):
   • Example: Dismissing the profound aspects of religious practice by focusing solely on social identity dynamics.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By not adequately recognizing the depth of religious experience, NVL risks a Type II error, overlooking the transformative and ethical dimensions of faith. 👀

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion on the parallels between fictional narratives like the Jedi Knight religion and traditional religious practices oversimplifies the role of religion in human life. His framework risks trivializing the depth and significance of genuine spiritual beliefs by reducing them to identity-constituting games of make-believe. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the importance of recognizing the profound role of religion in providing existential meaning, ethical guidance, and personal transformation. By maintaining a nuanced understanding of these elements, we can avoid the pitfalls of oversimplification and appreciate the full scope of religious traditions.

---

20:30 [MS] um yeah since you bring you
20:35 bring up Mormonism to the end of your book and the in the crazy gold plate story yeah okay it's crazy but it's you
20:42 know it's fairly recent we can see why it's historically kind of way out there
20:47 as opposed to being 2,000 years old or 4,000 years old 👌 Julius Sweeny the comedian I don't know if you've seen her
20:53 letting go of God monologue she she us yeah she she was a comedian for for Saturday Night Live one of the writers
21:00 and then one of the actors on Saturday Night Live for several years [NVL]yeah I'm going to write this out [MS]so then she left
21:05 the show and then um start doing monologues her monologue is called letting go of God so it it and it it
21:11 kind of tracks her journey from Catholic believer to atheist skeptic agnostic
21:17 whatever she was reading my books and Richard Dawkins and Hitchens and Har and so on anyway but she opens with a funny
21:24 story she's a comedian so she opens with a funny story of the Mormon boys coming by her house in holw would you know
21:29 their starch starch white shirts and their bicycles and and and they go we want to talk to you about God and so on
21:35 she's like okay this is going to be like a pitch meeting you know you know you you call my agent and Pitch it and then
21:41 I'll let you know she goes oh no that we got to come in and talk to you so anyway so they tell her they start to tell her the whole story uh about the you know
21:48 the Lost tribe of Israel and then Jesus stops by America on the way to heaven and all the you know just the goofyness
21:56 of this story the gold plates that put his face in the Hat with the magic Stone so he could translate the hieroglyphics
22:02 and she's okay stop don't start with this story 👀 okay even the Scientologist know to start with a personality test
22:10 right 👀

---

~Ananada~

1. Comparing Mormonism to Scientology:
   • [MS]: Compares Mormonism to Scientology, noting how even Scientologists start with a personality test rather than their more outlandish stories. 👀
   • Critical Insight: This comparison is problematic as it equates two distinct belief systems based on their perceived oddness rather than their substantive content or ethical teachings. Such comparisons can trivialize the genuine spiritual and community aspects of these religions, reducing them to mere objects of ridicule.
2. Identity and Narrative in Religion:
   • [NVL]: Suggests that religious narratives, like those in Mormonism, serve as identity-constituting games of make-believe.
   • Critical Insight: 🧘 This perspective, while partially acknowledging the role of narrative in forming group identity, risks reducing all religious experience to superficial identity games. Genuine religious beliefs often involve profound existential questions, moral guidance, and community support, which go beyond mere storytelling.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Respecting Diverse Belief Systems:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 neoBuddhism teaches respect for all belief systems, recognizing that each tradition offers unique insights and values. While some stories may seem unusual from an outside perspective, they hold significant meaning for believers.
2. Recognizing the Role of Humor:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 Humor can be a powerful tool for reflection and critique, but it should be used with care. Recognizing the deeper significance of religious narratives helps foster mutual respect and understanding.
3. Avoiding Simplistic Comparisons:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 Simplistic comparisons between different religions based on their origin stories or perceived absurdities can be misleading. A deeper understanding requires examining the ethical teachings, community practices, and spiritual experiences that define these traditions.

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

1. Type I Error (False Positive):
   • Example: Accepting the comedic portrayal of a religious story as an accurate representation of the entire belief system.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By emphasizing the absurdity of certain narratives, NVL risks committing a Type I error, presenting a superficial critique as a comprehensive understanding. 👀
2. Type II Error (False Negative):
   • Example: Dismissing the genuine spiritual and ethical dimensions of a religion because some of them have origin stories that seem unusual or absurd.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By not adequately acknowledging the deeper aspects of religious practice, NVL risks a Type II error, overlooking the profound nature of genuine spiritual convictions. 👀

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion on the narratives of newer religions like Mormonism, illustrated through Julia Sweeney’s comedic critique, risks oversimplifying and trivializing deeply held beliefs. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the importance of respecting diverse belief systems, recognizing the role of humor, and avoiding simplistic comparisons. By maintaining a nuanced understanding of religious narratives and their significance, we can foster mutual respect and appreciation for the profound aspects of various traditions.

---

and then she says then they s you know if you and if and you get to go to heaven if you're a Believer and uh and
22:17 you'll be made whole again so like if you're blind you'll see again if you're deaf you'll hear again so Julia says
22:23 well I had my uterus taken out because I had cancer do I get my uterus back and they're like
22:29 what it's really funny and then she goes what if you had a nose job and you liked it do I have to get my old nose back
22:36 anyway I guess that would be taking an approach of more of an empirical approach 👌 to these kind of religious claims that represent something else
22:43 [NVL]yeah the the sort of um uh you know there's there's a certain detail
22:49 resistance um and you know both with with make believe imaginings and
22:54 religious credences uh that that you know was again a Telltale sign of the difference between religious Credence
23:01 and conventional belief right ☝️ so if you if you tell me about uh a DNA test you took right I would i' say well okay well how
23:08 do you think uh you know this DNA from this continent got in there right how do
23:13 you think DNA from that continent got in there right well okay well where did Jesus's DNA come from right right and
23:21 and in asking that question you're kind of doing what Dennett calls breaking the spell right it's not an incoherent
23:27 question but it feels rude 💭 and what I want to zero in on I'm not I'm not using that
23:34 example to try to to to argue against the Virgin birth like I don't need to argue against the Virgin birth guess
23:40 what virgins don't have babies right I like I'm not going to bother arguing against that and and people who who
23:47 subscribe to you know Catholicism or Christianity they also they also know that virgins don't have babies right so
23:54 what's going on there and this sort of detail resistance I think you know the
23:59 spell that that uh you know dennet talks about is a sort of a way of protecting
24:06 the Sacred Space 💭 and of of not embarrassing the as as I'll put it
24:13 sacred the sacred play right not forcing people to to like you know admit that
24:20 it's it's sacred play 💭 so that's the kind of that's why there's that sort of shield around
24:27 certain questions that

---

~Ananada~

1. Empirical Approach to Religious Claims:
   • [MS]: Uses Julia Sweeney’s comedic example to highlight the empirical approach to religious claims, questioning the literal interpretation of religious promises about the afterlife.
   • Critical Insight: While humor can effectively critique the literal interpretation of religious claims, it can also oversimplify the deeper symbolic and metaphorical meanings embedded in these beliefs. neoBuddhism recognizes that religious narratives often carry profound existential and ethical insights, which go beyond their surface-level descriptions.
2. Detail Resistance in Religious Credence:
   • [NVL]: Suggests that both make-believe imaginings and religious credences exhibit a resistance to detail, differentiating them from conventional belief.
   • Critical Insight: 🧘 This observation highlights a potential defense mechanism within religious communities to protect sacred narratives from empirical scrutiny. However, equating this “detail resistance” with make-believe oversimplifies the complex relationship between faith and reason. neoBuddhism encourages a balanced approach, recognizing the symbolic value of religious narratives while remaining open to critical inquiry.
3. Questioning Religious Narratives:
   • [NVL]: Discusses how questioning religious narratives, like asking about Jesus’s DNA, can feel rude and break the “spell” that protects sacred beliefs.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 This analogy reflects a common tension between faith and empirical questioning. While it is important to respect religious beliefs, it is equally crucial to foster an environment where critical inquiry is welcomed. neoBuddhism supports a harmonious integration of faith and reason, where sacred narratives are understood both symbolically and critically.
4. Sacred Play and Virtue Signaling:
   • [NVL]: Refers to the protective “spell” around sacred play, suggesting that it shields certain questions to maintain the sacredness of religious narratives.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 This idea can be expanded to understand how virtue signaling can be used to avoid accountability and ostracize reasonable voices within religious communities. Historically, religious organizations have sometimes entrenched corrupt elements through extreme virtue signaling, marginalizing activists and reformers. neoBuddhism aims to avoid such dynamics by fostering transparency, accountability, and critical engagement within spiritual practice.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Balancing Symbolism and Critical Inquiry:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 neoBuddhism encourages recognizing the symbolic and metaphorical value of religious narratives while remaining open to critical inquiry. This balanced approach allows for a deeper understanding of faith without sacrificing intellectual integrity.
2. Fostering Respectful Dialogue:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 🧘 Respectful dialogue is essential when questioning religious beliefs. Critiques should be conducted in a manner that honors the symbolic significance of sacred narratives while promoting a culture of openness and inquiry.

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

1. Type I Error (False Positive):
   • Example: Accepting superficial critiques of religious narratives as comprehensive understandings.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By emphasizing the “detail resistance” of religious credences, NVL risks committing a Type I error, presenting a narrow critique as a full understanding of religious belief. 👀
2. Type II Error (False Negative):
   • Example: Dismissing the deeper symbolic and metaphorical meanings of religious narratives due to their empirical implausibility.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By not adequately acknowledging the profound symbolic significance of religious beliefs, NVL risks a Type II error, overlooking the deeper existential and ethical insights they offer. 👀

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion on the empirical approach to religious claims and the protective “spell” around sacred narratives highlights important aspects of how religious beliefs are maintained and questioned. However, this framework risks oversimplifying the complex relationship between faith and reason, and the profound symbolic meanings embedded in religious narratives. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the importance of balancing symbolism and critical inquiry, fostering respectful dialogue, and avoiding virtue signaling. By maintaining intellectual integrity and promoting accountability, we can ensure that religious communities remain open to diverse perspectives and genuine spiritual growth.

---

[MS]yeah yeah I have a good example this I was given a public talk once where I just riffed on the story I just
24:34 Rift with you with Julia Sweeney and the Mormons right and there was in the Q&A a young woman stood up she says I am
24:40 Mormon I also made fun of the Mormon underwear she goes I am wearing the Mormon underwear it isn't what you think
24:46 it I'm it's not Supernatural there's nothing magical I'm just paying respect
24:52 to my religion I'm just being respectful 🖖 yeah you know like you'd wear clothes or ring or whatever there's nothing magical
24:59 about my wedding ring it's just I'm it's I just wear it as honor to my wife that's it it's a symbol 🤏 and I thought
25:05 yeah okay I should not be disrespectful anymore that way I I I can see that 💭 [NVL]I um
25:11 this is a a bit of a a little bit of a digression but um there's this this podcast called the religious studies
25:18 project and um two I forget their names but two women uh ex Mormon um religious
25:26 studies Scholars uh do an episode on on the sacred garments and it is it is
25:33 fascinating I'll I'll uh I can look that up and and and shoot you they say it's something like paying respect and being
25:40 you know modest and respectful and something like that their perspective was more negative it's um it's very yeah
25:49 uh but but basically there are they're not welld designed for uh for for you
25:56 know fully functioning females I I'll I'll leave it at that 👀 [MS]yeah okay yeah that's maybe it's
26:01 more than I want to know yeah [NVL] yeah it's hey T TMI TMI but uh um [MS]yeah

---

~Ananada~

1. Understanding Symbolic Practices:
   • [MS]: Refers to the interaction with a Mormon woman who explained her wearing of Mormon underwear as a symbolic act of respect, not as something supernatural. This highlights the distinction between ritual practices and their perceived magical qualities.
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 This emphasizes the importance of understanding and respecting the symbolic and cultural significance behind religious practices. neoBuddhism encourages seeing these symbols as vehicles for deeper meanings rather than dismissing them as mere superstition.
2. Respecting Personal and Cultural Symbolism:
   • [MS]: Acknowledges the woman’s perspective, realizing that what may seem trivial or humorous to some might hold profound personal and cultural significance to others.
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭This aligns with the Buddhist principle of metta (loving-kindness) and mudita (sympathetic joy), promoting respect and understanding of others’ practices and beliefs, recognizing their value in the context of personal and cultural identity.
3. Digression to Critical Perspectives:
   • [NVL]: Mentions a podcast by ex-Mormon scholars critiquing the sacred garments, noting a more critical view on their functionality and design. This illustrates the diversity of perspectives within and about religious practices. 👀
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 While critical perspectives can shed light on practical and ethical concerns, they should be balanced with respect for the personal and cultural significance of these practices. neoBuddhism promotes a holistic approach, considering both the pragmatic and the spiritual dimensions.
4. TMI (Too Much Information):
   • [MS]: Humorously acknowledges the potential overshare about the practicality of sacred garments, highlighting the boundary between respectful inquiry and intrusive curiosity. 👀
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 This reflects the balance required in dialogue: maintaining curiosity and openness while respecting personal boundaries and cultural sensitivities. neoBuddhism encourages mindful communication, where questions are posed with sensitivity and compassion.

Key Points for Further Consideration

1. Symbolic Acts vs. Superstition:
   • Critique: 💭 Distinguishing between symbolic acts and superstitious beliefs is crucial. While some may view religious symbols skeptically, understanding their significance can foster greater respect and insight. neoBuddhism encourages recognizing the depth of meaning in religious practices without reducing them to mere superstition.
2. Cultural Sensitivity and Understanding:
   • Critique: 💭 The conversation underscores the need for cultural sensitivity and understanding in discussing religious practices. This is essential for fostering mutual respect and dialogue. neoBuddhism advocates for a compassionate approach, where different beliefs are honored and understood within their cultural and personal contexts.
3. Balancing Critique with Respect:
   • Critique: 💭 While critical perspectives are valuable, they should be balanced with respect and empathy for those who hold these beliefs. neoBuddhism promotes constructive criticism that aims to deepen understanding and enhance the spiritual well-being of all involved.

Conclusion and Integration

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion provides valuable insights into the symbolic and practical aspects of religious practices. By balancing critique with respect, and understanding the symbolic depth of these practices, we can foster a more inclusive and thoughtful dialogue. This approach aligns with the principles of neoBuddhism, which prioritize compassion, understanding, and the harmonious integration of diverse perspectives in the pursuit of wisdom and enlightenment.

---

[NVL]it's it's
26:07 interesting stuff um but yeah the interestingly um just looking around at
26:14 some online discussions of my books that have my book that has cropped up the it
26:19 seems like there are some Mormons who are are kind of receptive right and which might surprise you but kind of
26:25 like yeah this is kind of what we're doing right we're we're engaged in this this kind of uh I don't know if they
26:32 would quite admit it in these terms but it's a different sort of thing from uh
26:38 you know empirical you know just knowing how things are and and um I was talking to a friend of mine who's a Christian at
26:45 a dinner party and she says yeah I mean I'm a doctor right I don't you don't get people more empirical than me when it
26:52 comes to to thinking about the diseases uh that my patients have right and you
26:57 don't get someone who who scrutinizes the scientific evidence more than me uh
27:02 but when I you know relate to my ideas about Jesus about the resurrection it's
27:09 kind of a a different frame of mind right 🤏☝️ so so uh um Tanya lurman calls it
27:16 the faith frame versus I think she says the conventional frame uh but but the one frame
27:21 versus versus the other frame and so it's um it's actually the case that you
27:28 know some religious Believers um you know maybe more reflective ones and who
27:35 maybe aren't as caught up in in the idea of inherency are are more receptive uh
27:42 to to my idea that it's a different kind of cognitive relation uh than than a lot
27:48 of academics might predict 👀 right so what does that tell you maybe it tells you that those academics have the mod the
27:55 wrong model of religious psychology 🖖[MS]I think they do I I think that's right I used to have that model yeah I've been

---

~Ananada~

1. Reception of NVL’s Ideas by Religious Believers:
   • [NVL]: Notes that some Mormons and Christians seem receptive to his ideas, acknowledging that their religious beliefs operate differently from empirical knowledge.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 Recognizing the different cognitive frames used for empirical knowledge and religious beliefs is insightful. However, NVL’s suggestion that religious beliefs are akin to make-believe undermines the depth of spiritual conviction and experiential insight that these beliefs often entail. neoBuddhism values the integration of empirical knowledge with spiritual wisdom, seeing them as complementary rather than opposing frames of mind.
2. Faith Frame vs. Conventional Frame:
   • [NVL]: References Tanya Luhrmann’s concept of the “faith frame” versus the “conventional frame,” suggesting that religious believers switch between these cognitive modes.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 While it’s valid to acknowledge different cognitive approaches to understanding reality, this distinction should not reduce religious belief to a lesser form of cognition. Faith, in many traditions, encompasses profound truths about human existence and ethical living, which empirical science might not fully address. neoBuddhism encourages viewing these frames as interconnected rather than separate domains.
3. Different Cognitive Relations:
   • [NVL]: Argues that religious beliefs represent a different kind of cognitive relation compared to empirical facts, suggesting that academics might have the wrong model of religious psychology.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 This argument highlights the need for a more nuanced understanding of how religious beliefs function psychologically. However, describing religious beliefs as fundamentally different cognitive relations can oversimplify the richness of spiritual experience. neoBuddhism promotes a holistic understanding that integrates cognitive, experiential, and ethical dimensions of belief.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Integrating Empirical Knowledge and Spiritual Wisdom:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 neoBuddhism advocates for a balanced integration of empirical knowledge and spiritual wisdom. Both frames of understanding contribute to a comprehensive view of reality. Spiritual beliefs provide ethical guidance and existential meaning that complement empirical insights.
2. Respecting the Depth of Spiritual Beliefs:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 It is essential to respect the depth and significance of spiritual beliefs, recognizing that they often encompass profound truths about existence and morality. Reducing these beliefs to a different cognitive relation risks trivializing their importance in people’s lives.
3. Promoting a Holistic Understanding of Belief:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 A holistic understanding of belief systems should integrate cognitive, experiential, and ethical dimensions. This approach acknowledges the complexity and richness of religious beliefs, avoiding the pitfalls of oversimplification.

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

1. Type I Error (False Positive):
   • Example: Accepting the idea that religious beliefs are fundamentally different cognitive relations without considering their experiential and ethical dimensions.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By emphasizing a strict separation between faith and empirical knowledge, NVL risks committing a Type I error, oversimplifying the nature of religious belief. 👀
2. Type II Error (False Negative):
   • Example: Dismissing the cognitive and psychological complexity of religious beliefs due to their perceived difference from empirical facts.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By not adequately recognizing the richness and depth of religious experience, NVL risks a Type II error, overlooking the profound significance of spiritual beliefs. 👀

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion on the reception of his ideas by religious believers and the distinction between faith and conventional frames provides valuable insights into the cognitive approaches to belief. However, this framework risks oversimplifying the nature of religious belief by reducing it to a different cognitive relation. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the importance of integrating empirical knowledge and spiritual wisdom, respecting the depth of spiritual beliefs, and promoting a holistic understanding of belief systems. By maintaining a nuanced approach, we can appreciate the complexity and significance of religious beliefs in people’s lives.

---

28:00 rethinking it over the years and thinking of it different kinds of truths mythical truths religious truths or even
28:06 political truths versus empirical truths 👀 okay a funny story I don't apologies to
28:12 my listeners who heard this too many times but I'm at this conference with Richard Dawkins and Ken Miller Ken Miller is the great have you heard me
28:18 tell his story [NVL]uh you told it uh to Eric schwitz Gable who was on your show a
28:23 while ago [MS]that that's right so if I listeners here [NVL] yeah its mythological truth [MS]well
28:29 yeah yeah so um you know Richard's doing his thing about you know The God Delusion and all that and and then uh
28:36 Ken gives his spiel about mostly intelligent design creationism which he debunked but then but then you know he
28:42 wrote a book about this in the last chapter he says you know by the way I'm Catholic and so Richard's like all right Ken let me get this straight if we found
28:49 a piece of the True Cross finally and then on the piece of the True Cross was a little bit of Flesh we extracted the
28:55 DNA uh and it was jesus' DNA you know and and so Ken could see where this was going he's like Richard I'm not claiming
29:01 any of this is true I'm a Catholic this is what we believe 👀 and he's like oh uh
29:07 oh well there's not much more to say after that right 💭 so I mean Ken was there putting it in a different box a faith
29:14 frame rather than a conventional frame whereas Richard's focus on the conventional frame [NVL]right right and and if you're in the conventional
29:20 frame it it makes no sense to to say you know I think that P but not P right
29:27 you're like if if you're declaring not P then you don't think that P I mean
29:33 what's going what's going on here 👀 but if it's a different you know there's no there's nothing weird about saying uh I
29:40 imagine that P but not P or p is not true right there's there's nothing weird
29:46 about that you're you're you're you're engaged in a relation to the idea that P
29:52 in a way that will guide your behavior in certain kinds of play context and and
29:58 I think this is and and but you don't necessarily have the conventional belief right 🤏 and and maybe you don't and
30:04 sometimes the point is that you don't 👌 I mean one of the things that if if I'm right that what religious credences are
30:10 supposed to do is just Define your group identity it actually helps to have ones
30:17 that are a bit irrational or incoherent or maybe even false now why would that
30:22 be 💭

---

~Ananada~

1. Different Kinds of Truths:
   • [MS]: Discusses different kinds of truths: mythical, religious, political, and empirical, highlighting the nuanced nature of truth across various domains. 👀
   • Critical Insight: 💭 Understanding that different domains have different types of truth is crucial. neoBuddhism recognizes that empirical truths pertain to measurable phenomena, while religious and philosophical truths address aspects of existence that transcend empirical measurement. This distinction underscores the multifaceted nature of reality and the importance of integrating various forms of knowledge.
2. conventional Frame vs. Faith Frame:
   • [MS] and [NVL]: Use the example of Ken Miller, a Catholic scientist, to illustrate the difference between the faith frame and the conventional frame. Miller separates his religious beliefs from his empirical understanding of the world.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 This distinction is valuable in recognizing the different contexts in which beliefs operate. However, reducing religious belief to a different frame risks oversimplifying the depth and complexity of spiritual experiences. neoBuddhism emphasizes the integration of empirical and spiritual understanding, recognizing that they can coexist and enrich each other.
3. Engaging with Religious Credence:
   • [NVL]: 🤏 Argues that religious credences are different from conventional beliefs and that they guide behavior in certain contexts without necessarily being conventionally true. He suggests that having irrational or incoherent beliefs might help define group identity.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 While it is true that some religious narratives serve to strengthen group identity, it is a mistake to reduce all religious beliefs to this function. Many religious beliefs carry profound ethical and existential insights. neoBuddhism encourages discerning the deeper meanings behind religious narratives, recognizing their value beyond mere social cohesion.
4. Irrational Beliefs and Group Identity:
   • [NVL]: Suggests that irrational or incoherent beliefs might help define group identity, questioning why such beliefs would be beneficial.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 This perspective risks trivializing religious beliefs by focusing on their potential irrationality. While some beliefs may seem irrational from an empirical standpoint, they often encapsulate deeper truths about human existence, ethics, and the nature of reality. neoBuddhism promotes understanding the symbolic and metaphorical significance of these beliefs, rather than dismissing them as irrational.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Integrating Empirical and Religious Truths:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 neoBuddhism advocates for the integration of empirical and religious truths, recognizing that each domain provides valuable insights into different aspects of reality. Empirical truths address the measurable, while religious truths explore the ethical, existential, and psychological dimensions of life.
2. Respecting the Complexity of Belief:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 It is essential to respect the complexity of religious beliefs, acknowledging their profound ethical and existential significance. Reducing these beliefs to social identity markers or irrational credences oversimplifies their role in human life.
3. Fostering Holistic Understanding:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 A holistic understanding of belief systems involves integrating cognitive, experiential, and ethical dimensions. This approach fosters a deeper appreciation of the multifaceted nature of religious beliefs and their role in guiding human behavior and understanding.

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

1. Type I Error (False Positive):
   • Example: Accepting the idea that religious beliefs are fundamentally irrational or incoherent without considering their deeper significance.
   • NVL’s Misstep: 👀 By focusing on the irrational aspects of religious credences, NVL risks committing a Type I error, presenting a superficial critique as a comprehensive understanding.
2. Type II Error (False Negative):
   • Example: Dismissing the ethical and existential insights of religious beliefs due to their perceived irrationality.
   • NVL’s Misstep: 👀 By not adequately recognizing the deeper meanings of religious beliefs, NVL risks a Type II error, overlooking the profound significance of these beliefs in guiding human life.

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion on different kinds of truths and the distinction between faith and conventional frames provides valuable insights into how beliefs operate in different contexts. However, his framework risks oversimplifying the complexity and depth of religious beliefs by reducing them to irrational or incoherent credences that serve social identity functions. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the integration of empirical and spiritual truths, respecting the complexity of religious beliefs, and fostering a holistic understanding. By maintaining a nuanced approach, we can appreciate the profound significance of religious beliefs and their role in guiding human behavior and understanding.

---

30:29 well imagine a religion that said grass is green and the Sun is hot
30:29 it wouldn't be distinctive right you know okay you know Neil and Michael make the grasses green and Sun is hot
30:35 religion like well doesn't everyone just say that I mean what's what's different about you guys right ☝️ but if if if we say
30:42 something like well there's a there's a green god of the of the mountain who is
30:48 is uh able to hear your thoughts right okay that flouts reason but in flouting
30:54 reason it becomes distinctive right ☝️ and so group identity beliefs in in weird
31:01 ways they actually do their job better 👌 and this is this is I think one of my
31:06 you know important contributions if I if I may say so it's they do their job better if they had have sort of odd or
31:15 imp plausible or even outright false contents because that distinguishes the
31:21 ingroup right if you're going to bear the cost of asserting this and embracing
31:26 this um uh then you know you're different you're different from from
31:33 other groups right and and I can trust you more right because you're you're signaling the same thing as I'm
31:39 signaling 🤏 but what what's interesting in that is that you know some part of you
31:44 in order for you to recognize that this is the symbolic belief or group is belief or religious
31:50 Credence whatever you want to call it uh that we're going to religiously Creed you have to be aware of the
31:56 implausibility at some underlying level 💭 right Dan sperber points out that one of
32:01 the things that's interesting about anthropologists going to to Any Given
32:06 Society is how quickly they identify the symbolic beliefs right you know they how
32:12 quickly they identify the ones that are are really important for for ritual or
32:18 religion or group identity Constitution ☝️ right and why might that be well they're
32:24 the the implausible ones right ☝️ um anyway so so import [MS]a little bit like signal
32:32 detect or sorry a little bit like costly signaling theory that yeah you know the costlier it is for you to embrace
32:38 something or buy it or say it or whatever then that it's a signal to your fellow tribe how loyal you are or
32:45 dedicated or trustworthy 👀 [NVL]yeah so so if you think
32:51 about that a little further if conventional beliefs you know roughly speaking have
32:56 the job of tracking what the world is like in order that you don't do actions that fail like one of my favorite
33:02 examples is okay you conventionally believe this switch is connected to the light you flip it and the garbage disposal
33:08 goes on poof your conventional belief is updated right ☝️ you you you know longer
33:14 you had a false conventional belief now you got a true one 🤏 okay very very responsive
33:19 to evidence ✋

---

~Ananada~

1. Distinctive Beliefs and Group Identity:
   • [NVL]: Argues that distinctive, implausible beliefs strengthen group identity by flouting reason and setting the group apart. This distinctiveness makes the beliefs more effective in doing their job of defining in-groups and out-groups, which is primarily in the service of caste systems.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 While it is true that distinctive beliefs can strengthen group identity, reducing religious beliefs to merely irrational or implausible assertions trivializes their deeper significance. Genuine religious beliefs often encapsulate profound ethical and existential insights, which go beyond mere group identity markers. neoBuddhism recognizes the importance of these deeper dimensions and encourages understanding the symbolic value of religious narratives without reducing them to mere social signals.
2. Costly Signaling Theory and Loyalty:
   • [NVL] and [MS]: Discuss how costly signaling theory applies to religious beliefs, suggesting that the more irrational or costly a belief, the stronger the signal of loyalty and trustworthiness within the group, or a level of gatekeeping for protecting socially undesirable groups 👀
   • Critical Insight: 💭 While costly signaling can explain certain aspects of group dynamics, applying this theory to religious beliefs oversimplifies their complexity. Religious practices and beliefs often serve to foster ethical behavior, personal transformation, and a sense of connection with the transcendent, which cannot be fully explained by social signaling alone. neoBuddhism emphasizes the holistic nature of religious practice, integrating ethical, spiritual, and communal dimensions.
3. conventional Beliefs and Evidence:
   • [NVL]: Contrasts conventional beliefs, which are responsive to evidence, with religious credence, suggesting that the latter are less concerned with empirical truth and more with social cohesion. While ignoring that acquisition of empirical “beliefs” are not different from how people acquire religious beliefs, as most people are not doing empirical science. While pretending that cognitive biases would be different between them
   • Critical Insight: 💭 This distinction risks creating a false dichotomy between empirical and religious knowledge. While empirical truths are based on measurable evidence, religious and philosophical truths address aspects of human experience that transcend empirical measurement. neoBuddhism values both empirical and spiritual knowledge, recognizing that they address different but complementary aspects of reality.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Integrating Symbolic and Empirical Knowledge:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 neoBuddhism encourages the integration of ethical and empirical knowledge, recognizing that both are essential for a holistic understanding of reality. Symbolic beliefs in religion often encapsulate deeper ethical and existential truths that complement empirical knowledge.
2. Respecting the Depth of Religious Beliefs:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 It is essential to respect the depth and significance of religious beliefs, recognizing their role in guiding ethical behavior, fostering personal transformation, and creating a sense of connection with the transcendent. Reducing these beliefs to mere social signals trivializes their profound impact on human life.
3. Understanding Confirmation Bias and Evidence:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Humans often interpret evidence in biased ways, influenced by confirmation bias and other cognitive biases. Recognizing this helps in understanding the complexity of belief systems and the interplay between evidence and belief. neoBuddhism promotes critical thinking and mindfulness to navigate these biases and seek a deeper understanding of reality.

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

1. Type I Error (False Positive):
   • Example: Accepting that religious beliefs are primarily irrational or implausible social signals without considering their deeper significance.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By focusing on the irrational aspects of religious beliefs, NVL risks committing a Type I error, presenting a superficial critique as a comprehensive understanding. 👀
2. Type II Error (False Negative):
   • Example: Dismissing the ethical and existential insights of religious beliefs due to their perceived irrationality.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By not adequately recognizing the deeper meanings of religious beliefs, NVL risks a Type II error, overlooking the profound significance of these beliefs in guiding human life. 👀

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion on the distinctiveness of religious beliefs and their role in group identity highlights important aspects of how beliefs function socially. However, his framework risks oversimplifying the complexity and depth of religious beliefs by reducing them to irrational or implausible credences that serve social identity functions. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the integration of symbolic and empirical knowledge, respecting the depth of religious beliefs, and understanding the influence of cognitive biases. By maintaining a nuanced approach, we can appreciate the profound significance of religious beliefs and their role in guiding human behavior and understanding.

---

so and you know where the ditches are right where the fences are
33:25 uh whether your car is working or not you have to have true conventional beliefs to get from point A to point B and without
33:32 falling in the ditch along the way 🤏 all right uh that's because conventional beliefs guide truth dependent action ☝️ so they
33:38 need to be what I call evidentially vulnerable they need to update in light of the empirical evidence from the world
33:44 and most of the time this happens so quickly and smoothly that we don't even realize it you thought the supermarket
33:50 was open till 9: you see a sign says it's open till 8 poof conventional belief updates in line in line with truth ☝️ or at
33:56 least with evidence ☝️ all right but that characteristic feature of conventional belief
34:02 would be a bug when it came to religious Credence ☝️ right so if if your religious
34:08 credences say that there's a green God on the mountain or whatever pick your example were vulnerable to evidence in
34:15 the same way such that they would go poof when there was contrary to evidence
34:20 well you wouldn't be a very loyal group member 👀 would you right if you're if
34:25 you're uh uh Rel religious beliefs or group-ish beliefs could be um erased by
34:32 something as as volatile as what the world does then you're not you're not
34:38 sticking with us :om: rationality is from the standpoint of a staunch in group
34:44 surprisingly fickle ☝️

---

~Ananada~

1. Conflation of conventional Beliefs and Observations:
   • [NVL]: Discusses how conventional beliefs guide truth-dependent actions, needing to be “evidentially vulnerable” and updated based on empirical evidence. He uses examples like a supermarket’s closing time to illustrate this point.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 NVL conflates observations with conventional beliefs, which can be misleading. Observations, such as reading a sign, are not facts themselves but rather perceptions that may or may not be accurate. neoBuddhism values empirical evidence but also recognizes the importance of discerning between direct measurements and subjective observations.
2. Distinction Between conventional Beliefs and Religious Credences:
   • [NVL]: Argues that conventional beliefs need to be updated based on evidence, while religious credences do not, as they serve to reinforce group identity. He suggests that if religious beliefs were as vulnerable to evidence as conventional beliefs, they would undermine group loyalty.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 This distinction oversimplifies the nature of religious beliefs. While it is true that some religious beliefs serve to strengthen group identity, many also encompass profound ethical, philosophical, and existential insights that are not easily dismissed by empirical evidence. neoBuddhism promotes a balanced understanding that integrates empirical knowledge with deeper spiritual insights, recognizing that both can coexist and inform each other.
3. Misrepresentation of Rationality:
   • [NVL]: Implies that rationality is fickle from the standpoint of staunch in-groups, suggesting that loyalty to the group can override rational thinking. In reality, that is just dynamics of normative beliefs and have nothing to do with the religiosity of the group.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 This perspective risks misrepresenting the relationship between rationality and group dynamics. While group loyalty can influence beliefs, genuine rationality involves critical thinking and the integration of empirical evidence with ethical and philosophical understanding. neoBuddhism encourages the cultivation of wisdom that transcends mere group loyalty, fostering a more holistic and discerning approach to belief and knowledge.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Differentiating Observations from Facts:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 neoBuddhism emphasizes the importance of distinguishing between observations and empirical facts. Observations can be subjective and require verification through empirical measurement to be considered conventional. This discernment is crucial for maintaining intellectual integrity and a clear understanding of reality.
2. Integrating Empirical and Spiritual Knowledge:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 While empirical knowledge is vital for understanding the material world, spiritual knowledge addresses ethical, philosophical, and existential dimensions of life. Integrating these forms of knowledge allows for a more comprehensive and meaningful understanding of reality. neoBuddhism promotes this balanced approach, recognizing that both empirical and spiritual insights are valuable.
3. Promoting Critical Thinking and Wisdom:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Genuine rationality involves critical thinking, openness to evidence, and the integration of ethical and philosophical insights. This holistic approach fosters wisdom that transcends mere group loyalty, promoting a deeper and more nuanced understanding of belief and knowledge.

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

1. Type I Error (False Positive):
   • Example: Accepting observations as empirical facts without verification.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By conflating observations with conventional beliefs, NVL risks committing a Type I error, presenting subjective perceptions as established facts. 👀
2. Type II Error (False Negative):
   • Example: Dismissing the deeper significance of religious beliefs due to their perceived irrationality or group dynamics.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By not adequately recognizing the ethical and philosophical insights of religious beliefs, NVL risks a Type II error, overlooking their profound significance in guiding human behavior and understanding. 👀

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion on the distinction between conventional beliefs and religious credences highlights important aspects of how beliefs function. However, his framework risks oversimplifying the complexity and depth of religious beliefs by reducing them to irrational or implausible credences that serve social identity functions. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the importance of differentiating observations from empirical facts, integrating empirical and spiritual knowledge, and promoting critical thinking and wisdom. By maintaining a nuanced approach, we can appreciate the profound significance of religious beliefs and their role in guiding human behavior and understanding.

---

[MS] so would religious rituals be along the same line if I see
34:50 you every week and you're there in the pews and you're eating the cracker you're not eating meat on Fridays or
34:55 whatever it is uh what difference does it make what the rituals are a lot of them are kind of silly but that isn't the point the point
35:02 is doing the ritual 💭 [NVL]yeah the ritual is a manifestation of religious Credence 🖖
35:09 right and this is if you if you think about it I mean the characteristic this goes with my theory pretty well the
35:15 characteristics of of rituals uh let's take let's take sacrifice in in ancestor
35:21 worship all right we sacrifice an animal to our ancestors who may be Roam the forests there's there's been ancestor
35:28 worship in in a lot of different cultures around the world and it it tends to have sort of some similar
35:33 structures Right Where You commonly sacrifice an animal and the narrative is
35:39 that you are uh doing what the ancestors want right ☝️ but you end up eating the
35:45 meat yourself all right and there's going to be rationalizations for that and so on but it it ra it is rather like
35:52 having an imaginary friend right where you you know you pretend to Fe feed you
35:58 know as a child you pretend to feed a cookie to your imaginary friend and then
36:03 you you eat the cookie yourself ☝️ all right so there's that there's that structural parallel between a lot of
36:10 ritual and uh and make believe play it's just the gravity and the seriousness of
36:18 doing it versus not doing it is amped Up by its connection to Sacred values ☝️ which
36:24 are different from ordinary economic Utilitarian values and by its connection to group identity as we've been saying☝️

36:33 [MS]yeah yeah reading your book I you know rethinking some of my thoughts for in my next book on you know mythological
36:39 truths so I sent you that chapter yeah U you know so why not think of the
36:44 resurrection of Jesus or that he died for our sins or whatever is as a metaphorical truth or a literary truth
36:50 or a mythical truth it's whether it happened or not literally is beside the point 💭 you're missing the point my
36:55 analogy is you know ask If there really is a middlee earth in JRR tolan's Lord of the Rings like what
37:02 do you mean it's a novel it's a story about things they're asking about Shakespeare's shylock you know did he
37:08 really exist that's not the point the point is what did he say you know and what happened what are the stories cared
37:14 Jane Austin or doovi any great no you know great fiction has its own truths ✋
37:20 yeah so I've been trying this out on Christians particularly when I do public events and debates[NVL] right [MS]you know I'll
37:26 I'll give you that it's mythologically true you know it represents something deep about The Human Condition you being
37:32 born again or forgiving people and all the stuff that the resurrection represents and being born again as a Christian so on but they don't seem to
37:39 be buying this they're like no it it literally happened Paul himself said if
37:44 Jesus has not risen then whatever he said you shouldn't be a Christian right
37:49 well I don't know it seems like a higher truth if you're going to do kind of a Jordan Peterson uh Joseph Campbell kind
37:55 of look at this you know that what's wrong with having a deep respectful um kind of Truth found in
38:02 literature and arts ☝️ and myths and so on and

---

~Ananada~

1. Understanding Religious Rituals:
   • [MS]: Questions the significance of religious rituals, suggesting that the point is in performing the rituals rather than the specific actions involved.
   • [NVL]: Agrees, stating that rituals manifest religious credence and drawing a parallel between ritual and make-believe play. He highlights the role of rituals in reinforcing sacred values and group identity.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 Rituals hold deep symbolic and psychological significance, often serving as tangible expressions of spiritual beliefs and values. neoBuddhism views rituals as essential practices that connect individuals to their spiritual path and community. Reducing rituals to mere manifestations of credence or make-believe play oversimplifies their profound impact on personal and communal transformation.
2. Parallel to Imaginary Play:
   • [NVL]: Compares religious rituals, such as ancestor worship and sacrifices, to imaginary play, suggesting that rituals are serious and sacred versions of make-believe play.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 While the comparison to imaginary play might highlight the symbolic nature of rituals, it risks trivializing their significance. Religious rituals often embody deep ethical, existential, and communal meanings that go beyond mere symbolic acts. neoBuddhism emphasizes the importance of understanding and respecting the deeper dimensions of rituals.
3. Mythological Truths:
   • [MS]: Suggests viewing religious narratives, such as the resurrection of Jesus, as metaphorical or mythical truths rather than literal events. He compares this approach to understanding the truths found in literature and art.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 Recognizing the metaphorical and symbolic truths in religious narratives can provide valuable insights into the human condition and ethical principles. However, for many believers, the literal truth of these events is essential to their faith. neoBuddhism values both the metaphorical and literal dimensions of religious narratives, recognizing that they offer profound ethical and existential teachings.
4. Resistance to Metaphorical Interpretation:
   • [MS]: Notes that many Christians resist viewing the resurrection as a metaphorical truth, insisting on its literal occurrence. He suggests a Jordan Peterson or Joseph Campbell approach to understanding religious narratives.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 While metaphorical interpretations can enrich understanding, they should not dismiss the literal beliefs that are central to many religious traditions. neoBuddhism encourages a balanced approach that honors both the literal and symbolic aspects of religious teachings, fostering deeper comprehension and respect.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Respecting the Depth of Rituals:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 neoBuddhism acknowledges that rituals are more than symbolic acts; they are integral practices that connect individuals to their spiritual path and community. Understanding the ethical, existential, and communal dimensions of rituals is essential for appreciating their full significance.
2. Integrating Metaphorical and Literal Truths:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Religious narratives often contain both metaphorical and literal truths. Recognizing the value of both dimensions allows for a more comprehensive understanding of these narratives. neoBuddhism encourages this integrative approach, which respects the beliefs of adherents while exploring deeper symbolic meanings.
3. Promoting Holistic Understanding of Beliefs:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 A holistic understanding of religious beliefs involves acknowledging their cognitive, experiential, and ethical dimensions. This approach fosters respect for the profound impact of religious teachings on individuals and communities, avoiding oversimplification and trivialization.

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

1. Type I Error (False Positive):
   • Example: Viewing religious rituals as mere make-believe play without recognizing their deeper significance.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By emphasizing the symbolic nature of rituals, NVL risks committing a Type I error, presenting a superficial understanding of their profound impact. 👀
2. Type II Error (False Negative):
   • Example: Dismissing the literal beliefs of religious adherents in favor of metaphorical interpretations.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By not adequately recognizing the importance of literal beliefs to many adherents, NVL risks a Type II error, overlooking the full significance of religious narratives. 👀

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion on religious rituals and mythological truths highlights important aspects of how beliefs and practices function within religious communities. However, his framework risks oversimplifying the complexity and depth of religious rituals and narratives by reducing them to symbolic acts or make-believe play. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the importance of respecting the depth of rituals, integrating metaphorical and literal truths, and promoting a holistic understanding of religious beliefs. By maintaining a nuanced approach, we can appreciate the profound significance of religious practices and narratives in guiding human behavior and understanding.

---

[NVL]um I don't know it seems like that
38:08 that that's not going over well with well well I think [NVL]um yeah a couple of
38:13 couple of comments on that um one I I think you're right I I mean you know I I
38:21 am no longer religious but I love the fact that I I learned so many of those stories growing up like the Joseph story
38:27 The Exodus story you know Samuel David Solomon love that love that stuff right
38:33 you know less so the New Testament it's not it's not quite as fun but you know those Old Testament stories are are
38:39 fantastic um and you know maybe they they do represent some uh underlying
38:47 truth right ☝️ okay let's let's take a simple Example The Exodus story well here's here's an underlying truth that
38:53 The Exodus story uh represents setting aside the the floor detail tals of the of the traveling through the desert uh
39:00 large groups of people don't learn from mistakes easily right I think we can we
39:07 can both conventionally believe that one 💭 and the there's uh the story itself does
39:14 just a beautiful job of of of working that truth out in detail right ☝️ so this
39:20 is this is maybe what what you're you're calling mythological truth ☝️ now but I
39:26 think from a psychological Point here's what you need to add to that the the
39:31 religious person has to somehow be psychologically distinct from The
39:36 Atheist who just really appreciates the stories 👀

---

~Ananada~

Appreciation of Mythological Narratives:
– [NVL] expresses a fondness for biblical stories and acknowledges their value even from a non-religious standpoint. This viewpoint aligns with the neoBuddhist recognition of the universal truths and moral teachings that can be distilled from various mythological and religious narratives.

Underlying Truths in Mythological Stories:
– [NVL] suggests that stories like Exodus represent underlying truths, such as the difficulty large groups have in learning from past mistakes. From a neoBuddhist perspective, this interpretation can be insightful, but it also requires a careful parsing to avoid over-simplification or misrepresentation of the narrative’s complexities.

Critical Examination of Psychological Distinctiveness:
– [NVL]‘s point about the psychological distinction between religious individuals and atheists who appreciate religious stories only aesthetically introduces an interesting discussion on the diverse ways individuals engage with religious content. neoBuddhism encourages a deeper exploration here, recognizing that psychological engagement with religious or mythological stories can vary widely beyond simple dichotomies. This diversity should be acknowledged and respected, reflecting a comprehensive understanding of human spirituality and psychological makeup.

Use of Affirmation Seeking (“right”):
– [NVL] seeks affirmation with “right” is insightful. It highlights a common communicative strategy that might be used to assert a point without robust backing. In neoBuddhism, such tendencies are gently cautioned against, as they can lead to less genuine or less reasoned discourse. True understanding arises from open, honest exploration rather than seeking premature agreement. This can be observed in his claim that “the story itself does just a beautiful job of of of working that truth out in detail right” which is wrong, that story is remarkably lacking in detail despite the length of time it purports to cover. Though it is possible he has been trained on false data.

Sarcasm and Coherence:
– The noted sarcasm and potential incoherence in [NVL]’s discourse warrant a mindful critique. neoBuddhism values clear, compassionate, and truthful communication. Sarcasm, while sometimes useful for rhetorical purposes, can obscure deeper truths and hinder sincere dialogue. It’s pivotal to strive for clarity and sincerity in conveying profound insights, especially when discussing narratives that hold significant spiritual and moral weight.

First, NVL’s mention of biblical stories such as Joseph, Exodus, Samuel, David, and Solomon, and his appreciation for them despite his non-religious stance, can be seen as an acknowledgment of the cultural and moral narratives these stories provide. This is a point where neoBuddhist reflection might find common ground—recognizing the value in mythological narratives for their moral and ethical teachings, even if one does not adhere to the religious beliefs these stories are embedded in.

However, NVL’s transition into discussing the story of Exodus and its representation of an “underlying truth” that “large groups of people don’t learn from mistakes easily” is somewhat problematic from a neoBuddhist viewpoint. While it is true that stories can reveal important truths about human behavior and psychology, the claim that the Exodus narrative works this out in detail could benefit from further clarification and support. It’s crucial to approach such interpretations with a mindful skepticism to avoid overgeneralization and misrepresentation. 👀

Moreover, the assertion that “the religious person has to somehow be psychologically distinct from the atheist who just really appreciates the stories” introduces an interesting point of discussion. From a neoBuddhist perspective, this distinction might be overly simplistic and not reflective of the complex nature of belief in religious or mythological stories. It’s essential to recognize that individuals can engage with these narratives in various ways, irrespective of their religious beliefs, and that such engagement can still lead to profound insights and personal growth.

In summary, while NVL’s reflections on the value of biblical stories and their capacity to convey truths are commendable, his approach could benefit from a deeper, more nuanced exploration that avoids generalizations and seeks a more inclusive understanding of how individuals of different beliefs can find value and wisdom in these narratives.

---

all right so uh you know I'm I'm
39:43 an atheist who who really appreciates the stories and I even will will go along with this idea that there's some
39:49 underlying truth pointed at um but there has to be in order for um you know the
39:56 atheist merely imagines The Exodus story right and I'll say look I I enjoy reading the
40:03 story because it works my imagination and it's kind of it you know I can I can even you know go to plays like Joseph in
40:11 the Technicolor Dream Coat well that's not that's not Exodus but but you see what I'm saying 👀 and really enjoy the theater of it right and even go to
40:17 churches and and sometimes enjoy enjoy the uh the theater of it so the question then becomes well what
40:25 differentiates uh the the Rel religious quote unquote Believer from The Atheist
40:31 who really appreciates the stories and thinks they're they're underlying truth 💭 so so like like you're pointing out for
40:37 example and I think this is where the notion of of religious Credence actually does some useful work right so it's it's
40:45 like the the religious Credence it's working cognitively like the imaginings uh but unlike mere imaginings
40:56 it it it is sort of constitutive of
41:01 having group identity 🤏 right and that's going to give rise to a whole lot of
41:06 other features right and it also marks something as sacred right 🤏 so if you know
41:12 if if uh uh you know there were some documents portraying you know that had
41:17 biblical text on it you know the atheist will say okay let's just recycle it if we don't need want the paper you're much
41:24 more reluctant if you're if you're someone who has religious Credence 👀 so
41:29 having a group identity uh it constrains your behaviors in terms of what you can
41:35 assert or not assert ☝️

so so think about it like this it's like probably the
41:41 people you talk to it's like some part of them maybe wanted to say yes like and
41:47 some some Christians will will say this maybe behind closed doors like yeah it's just this uh story that that gestures at
41:54 deeper truth um but but because they're
42:00 required to Identity signal right in in public spaces uh talking to to the guy who
42:07 founded skeptic magazine they're they're not uh their religious credences constrain them to
42:14 not straightforwardly admit that that's what's going on 💭 um anyway that's that's
42:19 my read on it right they have to be distinct somehow from The Atheist who merely appreciates the stories so your
42:25 your question just to be frank put him in an awkward position 👀

---

~Ananada~

1. Appreciation versus Belief:
   • [NVL] discusses enjoying religious stories and the theatrical elements of religion, comparing his atheist appreciation to the engagement of a religious believer. From a neoBuddhist perspective, this raises an essential discussion about the nature of appreciation versus belief. While both can coexist, appreciation does not necessarily entail the deep, transformative belief that often characterizes religious adherence. Appreciation might engage the intellect and emotions, but belief transforms the way one interacts with the world and oneself.
2. Group Identity and Sacredness:
   • [NVL] asserts that group identity marks something as sacred and influences behaviors and assertions within that group. This oversimplification would portray all groups as religious, which would render the distinction between religious affiliation and corporate affiliations nonresistant, Thereby sacralizing greed. :om: neoBuddhism would caution against oversimplifying this relationship. Sacredness is not merely a function of group consensus but is deeply intertwined with individual and collective experiences of transcendence, ethical commitments, and spiritual insights.
3. Misunderstandings about Religious Artifacts:
   • [NVL]‘s example of how an atheist might view biblical texts solely as recyclable paper versus a believer who sees them as sacred objects is an oversimplification that fails to capture the diversity within religious communities about how sacred texts are treated. neoBuddhism recognizes that the intrinsic value of religious texts or artifacts arises not from the objects themselves but from the meanings and teachings they embody. The act of recycling a physically damaged or surplus religious text does not necessarily denote disrespect but can be seen as a practical acknowledgment of the impermanence of material forms in favor of preserving and living the teachings contained therein.
4. Identity Signaling and Authentic Belief:
   • [NVL] suggests that public adherence to religious beliefs might sometimes serve more as identity signaling rather than an expression of genuine conviction. This observation invites a critical neoBuddhist reflection on the authenticity of belief and the pressures of conformity within religious communities. While it is undoubtedly true that social dynamics can influence religious expression, neoBuddhism encourages a path where beliefs are held with sincerity and integrity, free from the dual pressures of societal expectation and skepticism.

---

[MS]yeah yeah okay I see that now right
42:34 um okay let's let's think about this this pragmatic truths can some of these
42:40 religious doctrines be true in a pragmatic sense like you know don't wear
42:46 the don't eat these mixed kind of foods or wear these kind of mixed uh
42:51 clothing cloths and or any of the rituals they may actually have value you
42:57 you know pragmatically for your personal life for social life they work whether
43:02 they're true or not again is beside the point 👀 it's kind of a pragmatic truth 👌 [NVL] yeah I mean I mean look it you know
43:09 religion wouldn't be around if it weren't doing something doing something useful right so so let's distinguish
43:14 between the the normative and the descriptive claims of Any Given religion I've i' I'm kind of you know my book is
43:21 more focused on the descriptive claims like kind of asking the question like you ask in uh in in your recent book
43:28 like why rational people you know I'll put it in scare quotes believe uh crazy
43:33 things right and that's where I developed this idea that religious Credence is like imagining but the normative things like rules like um you
43:41 know don't work on the Sabbath or uh um you you know uh pray five times a day or
43:50 uh sacrifice to the ancestors um or you know have have this
43:55 kind of come of age ritual okay those are going to be normative those are going to be normative claims 👀 um and they're
44:03 they're kind of like commands right and some of them some of them are going to
44:08 be uh um you know very very much just incidental kind of ornamental things
44:15 that help distinguish you from from the other group 🖖right so whether whether or not you you know you wear the hat this
44:22 way or this way it might signal your group identity it's there's no functionality to it ☝️

---

~Ananada~

1. Pragmatic Truths in Religious Doctrines:
   • [MS] introduces the idea of pragmatic truths within religious doctrines, suggesting that practices might hold practical value regardless of their conventional truth. This concept aligns with the neoBuddhist recognition that many religious practices, while not necessarily empirically verifiable, can foster ethical behavior, social cohesion, and personal well-being.
2. Normative and Descriptive Claims:
   • [NVL] distinguishes between normative claims (rules and commands) and descriptive claims (beliefs about the world) within religious contexts. While this distinction is valid, it is crucial to recognize that normative claims often carry profound ethical and spiritual significance that transcends mere group identity signaling. From a neoBuddhist perspective, practices like observing the Sabbath or other rituals are not just about demarcating identity but about cultivating mindfulness, community, and spiritual discipline.
3. Oversimplification of Religious Practices:
   • [NVL]‘s comments on practices like “don’t work on the Sabbath” and other rituals risk oversimplifying their significance. For instance, understanding the Sabbath merely as a day of “not working” misses the broader spiritual and ethical dimensions it embodies, such as the importance of rest, reflection, and community. The weekend, as a societal institution, indeed has its roots in religious observance, reflecting deeper pragmatic truths about human well-being and societal functioning.
4. Misunderstanding the Depth of Religious Beliefs:
   • [NVL]‘s comparison of religious attendance to “wearing a hat” for identity signaling trivializes the deeper spiritual and communal aspects of religious practices. From a neoBuddhist perspective, such practices are imbued with intentions to cultivate virtues, foster compassion, and connect with the transcendent. Equating them with mere identity markers fails to appreciate the profound personal and collective transformation they aim to facilitate.

---

but I do think I do
44:28 think a lot of them you know like the the community building aspects uh they are they are functional right 🤏so I
44:34 remember for example um in uh 2016 I was I was in Israel for a wedding so and I
44:40 was I was uh staying with uh Mo modern Orthodox Jews and uh on Saturday I I
44:47 really loved it I mean we need to do anything right there's all this food laid out you know everything was set up
44:53 and we could just hang out right and it's like being required to not do work is
45:00 better than just not doing work because you don't even worry about it right ☝️ so I I you know I've tried to to Institute
45:06 that without being religious 👀 so I think you know kind of communal meals uh they
45:11 do have uh a lot of a lot of social function and pragmatic value and and uh
45:17 support you know support systems 🖖 I mean the all all the studies seem to show that that religious people tend to be
45:24 you know healthier mentally and physically I don't think that's through Supernatural agency it's it's through
45:30 having more community 🖖 so yeah there's there's there's going to be all sorts of functionality [MS]uh but but but then
45:37 there's a related subject that I I talked about in in that chapter I sent you Martin Gardner the great skeptic who
45:43 is also a Believer sort of a a fist FIDIST called himself based on William James's
45:50 and Miguel unamuno's prag pragmatism theory of Truth 👀 um no one knows for sure
45:57 if there's a God or not and you know no one knows for sure if we're determined or we have some kind of free will or whatever on why there's something rather
46:04 than nothing and when when it can't be determined empirically and it's important uh to your life it's okay to
46:12 just go ahead and believe whatever you want 👀 so as Martin said you know I think there is a God even though I think the
46:17 atheists have better arguments than the theist but still right uh or that you know I can pray or I think there's an
46:23 afterlife or whatever I don't know what do you think about arguments like that well I think they equivocate on the word
46:29 believe 🖖

---

~Ananada~

Community Building Aspects of Religion:
– [NVL]: Acknowledges the functional and social benefits of religious practices, such as communal meals and rest days, which foster community and provide mental and physical health benefits.
– Critical Insight: 💭 Recognizing the social functions of religious practices is valuable. neoBuddhism also values communal activities and ethical practices that strengthen social bonds and promote well-being. However, reducing these practices to mere functional aspects overlooks their deeper spiritual and ethical dimensions. While [NVL] also fails to note the many other functional aspects which are non-religious in nature.

Pragmatic Benefits of Religious Practices:
– [NVL] acknowledges the practical and communal benefits of religious practices, such as communal meals and Sabbath observance, which can foster social bonds and provide support systems. neoBuddhism also recognizes the importance of communal practices in cultivating compassion, mindfulness, and a sense of interconnectedness. These practices are not merely functional but are deeply embedded in the spiritual and ethical framework of the community.

Health Benefits of Community:
– [NVL] observes that religious people tend to be healthier mentally and physically, attributing this to the strong community support rather than supernatural agency. This observation aligns with neoBuddhist teachings, which emphasize the value of Sangha (community) as one of the Three Jewels (Buddha, Dharma, Sangha) that support spiritual growth and well-being. The sense of belonging and mutual support within a community can be profoundly healing and transformative.

Fideism and Rational Belief:
– [MS]: Mentions Martin Gardner’s stance on fideism, which suggests that when empirical evidence is lacking, it is acceptable to believe whatever is important to one’s life. 👀
– [NVL]: Criticizes fideism for equivocating on the word “believe,” suggesting that rational belief and religious belief are separate processes.
– Critical Insight: 💭 Fideism’s separation of rationality and belief is problematic. Rationality and belief are intertwined, and dismissing one in favor of the other leads to an incomplete understanding of reality. neoBuddhism integrates rational inquiry with spiritual practice, recognizing that true wisdom arises from the balance of both.

Equivocation on the Word “Believe”:
– [NVL]: Argues that fideism equivocates on the word “believe,” implying that rational belief and religious belief are distinct and incompatible.
– Critical Insight: 💭 This equivocation is misleading. Belief, whether rational or religious, involves a complex interplay of evidence, intuition, and experience. neoBuddhism encourages a nuanced understanding that transcends simplistic dichotomies, fostering a more integrated approach to knowledge and belief.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

Integration of Rationality and Belief:
– neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 neoBuddhism promotes the integration of rationality and belief, recognizing that they are not mutually exclusive but rather complementary. Rational inquiry enhances spiritual understanding, while spiritual practices provide ethical and existential insights that inform rational thought.

Holistic Understanding of Religious Practices:
– neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Religious practices have profound ethical and spiritual dimensions that go beyond their functional benefits. neoBuddhism values these practices for their role in fostering personal and communal transformation, emphasizing the importance of understanding their deeper significance.

Rejecting Simplistic Dichotomies:
– neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 The separation of rational and religious belief, as suggested by fideism, is an oversimplification. neoBuddhism encourages a holistic approach that acknowledges the complexity of belief systems, integrating empirical evidence, ethical considerations, and spiritual insights.

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

Type I Error (False Positive):
– Example: Accepting fideism’s separation of rationality and belief without recognizing their interdependence.
– NVL’s Misstep: By emphasizing this separation, NVL risks committing a Type I error, presenting an incomplete and misleading view of belief.

Type II Error (False Negative):
– Example: Dismissing the deeper spiritual and ethical significance of religious practices due to their functional aspects.
– NVL’s Misstep: By focusing solely on the functional benefits of religious practices, NVL risks a Type II error, overlooking their profound spiritual and ethical dimensions.

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion on the functional aspects of religious practices and fideism provides valuable insights into the social benefits of religious beliefs. However, his framework risks oversimplifying the complexity and depth of religious beliefs and practices by separating rationality from belief and focusing solely on functional benefits. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the integration of rationality and belief, the holistic understanding of religious practices, and the rejection of simplistic dichotomies. By maintaining a nuanced approach, we can appreciate the profound significance of religious beliefs and practices in guiding human behavior and understanding.

---

[MS]okay um [NVL]is is the is is the The crucial flaw there I mean maybe maybe
46:37 what he's doing is is okay but you know if he's saying oh I think the atheists
46:43 have better arguments but I'm going to believe anyway uh you know he's not
46:49 believing it in the conventional belief way that I believe Atlanta is in Georgia and
46:55 and you believe that Santa Barb in California right that that really is you know heavily constrained by evidence and
47:02 you can't just decide to do it um you know if uh if you conventionally believe you
47:07 know like I conventionally believe that the light was connected that the switch was connected to the light and uh you know
47:14 garbage disposal goes on when I hit the switch and poof right I can't choose to
47:20 to conventionally believe other than what the evidence tells me ☝️ to do um so the fact
47:26 that was a voluntary state that he was engaged in already shows it's a different kind of cognitive relation
47:33 from your ordinary conventional belief ☝️so this this is actually is an argument that you know I like I like William
47:39 James and I like that essay the the will to believe but I think he really is um
47:45 doing a disservice by equivocating on on the word believe 👀 and and it's kind of
47:50 like okay well why not just if it's a different psychological State call it something different 💭 and in point of fact
47:57 people kind of do because they tend to use believe for what I call religious Credence and and think for for for
48:04 conventional beliefs right even though there's a lot of there's a lot of uh you know variation in that 💭that's a that's a
48:10 kind of General tendency right 💭so even intuitively people are uh are
48:17 differentiating uh religious Credence and conventional belief by their usage of of the words think versus believe [MS]yeah [NVL]and
48:23 it's really kind of academics uh I'm going to I'm going to uh annoy my my
48:28 philosophical friends who have conflated a bunch of different kinds of things under this one noun belief🖖 right then
48:36 that has led to a lot of a lot of confusion about what's going on psychologically with religious with
48:42 religious attitudes 🖖

---

~Ananada~

Critique from a neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Conflation of Facts and Beliefs:
   • [NVL]: Conflates facts and beliefs, suggesting that all information, whether correct or incorrect, can be considered factual. He uses the example of believing a light switch controls a light, which turns out to control a garbage disposal instead, to illustrate his point.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 This conflation is fundamentally flawed. Facts are objective truths that can be verified, while beliefs are subjective, and can be incorrect. neoBuddhism values discernment and clarity in understanding the distinction between facts and beliefs, recognizing that conventional knowledge and personal beliefs play different roles in shaping our understanding of reality.
2. Misunderstanding of Cognitive Relations:
   • [NVL]: Argues that believing in religious doctrines and conventional statements involve different cognitive processes. He criticizes William James’ “The Will to Believe” for equivocating on the word “believe” and suggests using different terms to differentiate these cognitive states.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 While it is important to recognize different cognitive approaches, NVL’s argument oversimplifies the complexity of belief systems. To note, equivocating on the word “believe” is his primary methodology for this entire dialogue. neoBuddhism acknowledges that both empirical evidence and personal beliefs contribute to a comprehensive understanding of reality. Beliefs, whether religious or empirical, are not merely cognitive states but integral parts of our worldview.
3. Usage of ‘Think’ vs. ‘Believe’:
   • [NVL]: Suggests that people intuitively differentiate between religious credence and conventional belief by using the words “think” and “believe” differently. He argues that academics have conflated different kinds of beliefs, leading to confusion about religious attitudes.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 Language usage does reflect different types of beliefs, but NVL’s argument again risks oversimplifying the nuances of belief systems. neoBuddhism promotes a deeper understanding of how language reflects our cognitive processes, recognizing that words like “think” and “believe” are used contextually to express varying degrees of certainty and conviction, not different cognitive processes

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Distinguishing Facts from Beliefs:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 neoBuddhism emphasizes the importance of distinguishing between facts, which are objective and verifiable, and beliefs, which are subjective and can be incorrect. This distinction is crucial for developing a clear and accurate understanding of reality.
2. Integrating Empirical and Spiritual Knowledge:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Both empirical evidence and personal beliefs are essential for a holistic understanding of reality. While empirical knowledge provides a foundation of verifiable facts, spiritual beliefs offer ethical, existential, and experiential insights. neoBuddhism promotes the integration of these forms of knowledge to foster a balanced and comprehensive worldview.
3. Nuanced Understanding of Language:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Language reflects the complexity of our cognitive processes and belief systems. Words like “think” and “believe” are used contextually to convey different levels of certainty and conviction. He incorrectly portrays this process as being uniquely religious. neoBuddhism encourages a nuanced understanding of how language shapes our perception of reality and expresses our beliefs.

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

1. Type I Error (False Positive):
   • Example: Accepting incorrect beliefs as facts without verifying their accuracy.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By conflating facts and beliefs, NVL risks committing a Type I error, presenting subjective beliefs as objective truths. 👀
2. Type II Error (False Negative):
   • Example: Dismissing the significance of personal beliefs by overly emphasizing empirical evidence.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By not adequately recognizing the importance of personal beliefs, NVL risks a Type II error, overlooking their role in shaping our understanding of reality. 👀

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion on the distinction between conventional beliefs and religious credence highlights important aspects of how beliefs function. However, his framework risks oversimplifying the complexity and depth of belief systems by conflating facts with beliefs and misunderstanding their cognitive relations. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the importance of distinguishing between facts and beliefs, integrating empirical and spiritual knowledge, and understanding the nuanced role of language in expressing our beliefs. By maintaining a nuanced approach, we can appreciate the profound significance of beliefs and their role in guiding human behavior and understanding.

---

[MS]a really good point I mean I make the point you know do you believe in evolution no I it's not
48:48 something I believe in it just is like the Big Bang Theory it just is it's just it's a fact of
48:55 nature 💭but where I I would say I believe in uh a more open approach to
49:01 immigration or I believe in a progressive tax system versus a regressive there I would use the word
49:07 belief [NVL]that's right that's right so and take take for take this phrase and it
49:13 comes very naturally heartfelt belief okay you know I have a I have a heartfelt belief that we should that we
49:19 should be kind of immigrants or that immigrants have done really good things for the United States and well my
49:26 Grandparents were immigrants but even contemporarily they're still doing good things uh for for the United States
49:32 that's a heartfelt belief but you don't describe your straightforward conventional beliefs as heartfelt right 👀 you know
49:39 Michael has the heartfelt belief that Google Chrome is a web browser no you just right you just think
49:45 it's so and you're right and you you know you say or you know that it's you know that it's it's so so um uh one one
49:53 kind of move that people kind of try to make against my theory is that you're
49:59 saying oh you Pete you're uh saying religious Credence is a kind of imagining and what about these
50:06 people who who really have heartfelt beliefs 👀 and I'm saying well the conventional
50:12 that you're using the phrase heartfelt it just shows it's not the sort same sort of thing as as conventional
50:18 beliefs right 💭again Dan sperber has a great way of putting this conventional beliefs are what appear just like plain
50:24 knowledge to the person who has them now they might not be right you might be mistaken about something uh but if you
50:31 conventionally believe that P it seems to you like you know that P right whereas this more emotion Laden kind of embrace of an
50:40 idea that's already a different thing 💭

---

~Ananada~

1. Distinguishing Belief from Fact:
   • [MS]: Sarcastically emphasizes that certain concepts, like evolution or the Big Bang Theory, are conventional and not beliefs, whereas beliefs are held about values or opinions, such as immigration policies or tax systems.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 Distinguishing between beliefs and facts is essential. [MS] does not believe Big Bang Theory is conventional, he was testing [NVL] for Scientism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism which is essentially people who use science as an identity, without actually believing in science in a reverential way. Which demonstrates that understanding originates in belief, in science or anything else, while falsely profession a belief for the sake of virtue signalling, without really believing, results in a lack of understanding in the context of that belief system. Just as [NVL] has demonstrated a poor grasp of science, while claiming to perform research, most probably generates “bad science” or incorrect science, which is not unlike what happens with scientific paper mills. So the lack of belief in science in a moral and ethical, reverential way, is why science can often be dysfunctional, Which parallels what happens in religions, including the human behavioral aspects. neoBuddhism acknowledges that empirical facts are objective and verifiable, while beliefs, especially ethical and philosophical ones, are subjective and shaped by personal and cultural contexts. Whole hardheartedly believing in both science and neoBuddhism, is why neoBuddhists are more accurate than people who believe in science, or religion, to the exclusion of the other.
2. Heartfelt Beliefs and Emotional Attachment:
   • [NVL]: Discusses “heartfelt beliefs,” suggesting that such beliefs are different from conventional beliefs due to their emotional attachment. He argues that heartfelt beliefs are not described in the same way as straightforward conventional beliefs.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 Heartfelt beliefs indeed carry an emotional dimension that conventional beliefs do not. neoBuddhism values both types of beliefs, recognizing that heartfelt beliefs often guide our ethical actions and personal commitments. However, it is important to avoid oversimplifying the role of emotions in shaping our understanding of reality.
3. conventional Beliefs as Plain Knowledge:
   • [NVL]: Cites Dan Sperber, suggesting that conventional beliefs appear as plain knowledge to those who hold them, even if they might be mistaken. He differentiates between conventional beliefs and emotion-laden embraces of ideas.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 This simply describes the primary dynamic of “pop culture” and why it is frequently incorrect. He this attempts to foist this normative definition of “truth” on [MS] which is another example of moral relativism posing as an authority. By re-defining “conventional beliefs” with the claim that “appear as plain knowledge to those who hold them, even if they might be mistaken” even though that is literally the description of belief. So [NVL] is misrepresenting the meaning and definitions of words by appealing to popularity. That is the essence of moral relativism.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Integrating Objective Facts and conventional Beliefs:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 neoBuddhism promotes the integration of objective facts and conventional beliefs, recognizing that both are essential for a comprehensive understanding of reality. Empirical facts provide a foundation for our knowledge, grounding it in reality, while conventional beliefs represent the bulk of human culture and society which is not a fact of nature. Without which they would be unable to meaningfully navigate the world in which they reside.
2. Understanding the Role of Emotions in Beliefs:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Emotions play a significant role in shaping our beliefs and actions. Heartfelt beliefs, infused with emotional attachment, often drive our ethical and compassionate actions. neoBuddhism values the balance between rational understanding and emotional wisdom, fostering a compassionate and insightful approach to life.
3. Acknowledging Cognitive and Emotional Interplay:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Both cognitive and emotional aspects contribute to our belief systems. Recognizing this interplay allows us to develop a more nuanced and holistic understanding of how we perceive and interact with the world. neoBuddhism encourages mindfulness and critical thinking to navigate this complex interplay effectively, as well as an understanding of the quantitative quality of emotion required to understand cognition

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

1. Type I Error (False Positive):
   • Example: Confusing conventional beliefs with objective facts, leading to the misrepresentation of personal opinions as empirical truths.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By not clearly distinguishing between heartfelt beliefs and facts, manufacturing the self-contradictory term “factual beliefs”, NVL is committing a Type I error, presenting subjective, conventional beliefs as if they were objective facts.
2. Type II Error (False Negative):
   • Example: Dismissing the significance of heartfelt beliefs by overly focusing on empirical evidence, thus neglecting the emotional and ethical dimensions of belief systems.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By not adequately recognizing the importance of heartfelt beliefs, NVL risks a Type II error, overlooking the profound lack of understanding of emotions and ethics, and their interaction with human behavior and understanding.

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion on heartfelt beliefs and facts provides no insights into the different dimensions of belief systems, because of his rampant misuse of the word “conventional”. His framework oversimplifies the complexity and depth of beliefs by not fully acknowledging the interplay between cognitive and emotional aspects. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the integration of objective facts and conventional beliefs, the role of emotions in shaping our understanding, and the nuanced interplay between cognition and emotion. By maintaining a balanced approach, we can appreciate the profound significance of both conventional and heartfelt beliefs in guiding human behavior and understanding.

---

[MS]yeah [NVL]and we try it it it as telltale
50:45 signs in language that's what I was trying to trying to do with in in the research that that focused on think
50:50 versus belief 💭[MS]but there in my example you know I believe in a high tax rate
50:56 for upper income whatever it is yeah I mean there is no right answer to that 👌so
51:01 when I'm signaling when I say I believe I'm signaling my Democratic Tendencies
51:07 or if I go the opposite the conservative tribe or something like I believe in low taxes and small
51:12 government that's different than I believe in evolution🖖[NVL] yeah yeah they're um
51:19 they're the political beliefs this is this is kind of why I focus on religious beliefs yeah they're they're kind of
51:25 oddly mixed right I gave a I gave a research presentation once that was
51:30 called something like why religious no why political convictions are in between
51:35 religious Credence and conventional belief right and there there is um you know
51:42 take take let's stick with descriptive propositions right like uh lowering
51:47 something like lowering the tax rate increases the GDP right now that's you
51:53 might just think it so right you might be an econom who thinks yeah the GDP will rise if we lower the tax rate but
52:01 for a lot of people they have something more like a religious Credence attitude
52:06 toward that same proposition right 🤏 and you're going to see you're going to see the the the kind of identity
52:12 constituting features the the sacred value type stuff where there's outrage
52:17 uh when people when people argue the contrary or or people kind of form packs
52:23 around 👀 it um and it's also Less revisable in light of contrary evidence
52:28 right ✋

---

~Ananada~

Conflation of Identity and Belief:
– [NVL]: Conflates political and religious beliefs with identity markers, suggesting that these beliefs serve to signal group identity and not sacred values. He mentions the outrage and group formation around contrary views as evidence of this.
– Critical Insight: 💭 While identity can influence both political and religious beliefs, equating them primarily with identity markers overlooks their deeper ethical and philosophical dimensions. neoBuddhism emphasizes the importance of understanding the underlying principles and values that shape beliefs, rather than reducing them to mere identity signals.

Impact of Cognitive Biases:
– [NVL]: Notes that political convictions are less revisable in light of contrary evidence, similar to religious credence.
– Critical Insight: 💭 Cognitive biases can indeed affect how individuals process and update their beliefs. However political convictions change all the time, which is obvious when considering how much the law changes over time. Including the constitutions of countries. So this claim lacks evidential basis. neoBuddhism advocates for mindfulness and critical thinking to mitigate these biases, promoting a more open and reflective approach to belief formation and revision.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

Nuanced Understanding of Beliefs:
– neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Beliefs, whether political, religious, or conventional, are complex and multifaceted. They are shaped by cognitive processes, societal influences, and personal experiences. neoBuddhism encourages a nuanced understanding of these influences, recognizing the interplay between identity, ethics, and knowledge.

Promoting Reflective Belief Formation:
– neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Reflective belief formation involves critically examining the reasons behind our beliefs and being open to revising them in light of new evidence and insights. This approach fosters intellectual humility and a deeper understanding of the world.

Balancing Identity and Principle:
– neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 While identity can play a role in shaping beliefs, it is important to balance identity with ethical and philosophical principles. neoBuddhism emphasizes the importance of aligning beliefs with compassionate and ethical values, rather than merely using them as identity markers.

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

Type I Error (False Positive):
– Example: Accepting political or religious beliefs as conventional without sufficient evidence.
– NVL’s Misstep: By conflating political and religious beliefs with conventional beliefs, NVL risks committing a Type I error, presenting identity-based beliefs as objective truths.

Type II Error (False Negative):
– Example: Dismissing the ethical and philosophical dimensions of political and religious beliefs by reducing them to identity markers.
– NVL’s Misstep: By focusing on the identity aspects of beliefs, NVL risks a Type II error, overlooking the deeper ethical and philosophical principles that inform these beliefs.

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion on the nature of political and religious beliefs highlights important aspects of how identity influences belief systems. However, his framework risks oversimplifying the complexity and depth of these beliefs by conflating them with identity markers and ignoring their ethical and philosophical dimensions. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes a nuanced understanding of beliefs, promoting reflective belief formation and balancing identity with ethical principles. By maintaining a balanced approach, we can appreciate the profound significance of beliefs in guiding human behavior and understanding.

---

so this is this is another point that i' like to emphasize in principle
52:33 anything can be sacralized right anything can be made
52:38 into something that you religiously Creed uh and so we see that from you know the the free market True Believers
52:46 you know again I I think that the most of the economy should be largely free
52:51 market right I'm not I'm not uh ideologically opposed to it I think it's probably a good idea for many things
52:58 maybe most things right but the free market True Believers have a different attitude right a different attitude type
53:05 so any anything anything can be sacralized um and we should just at
53:11 least be honest with ourselves what's going on with our own attitudes 💭and the
53:16 attitudes of others how about land is this the problem in the Middle East a land is being sacralized and to try to put
53:23 a price on it is be like it be like 👀 anyway [NVL]yeah that's right yeah this is this is uh
53:29 just just for your listeners I'll I'll preview a little bit I go I go into sacred values uh in in chapter 7 of my
53:36 book and they work different from ordinary utilitarian values right so our our our system of valuing that we can
53:43 think of as economic or utilitarian it's pretty rational 👀 it it trades things off
53:48 fairly well 👀 like if I were to ask you the question okay is is that pair of sneakers worth the cost of a Year's
53:55 Netflix subscription you would think about it be like okay I hadn't thought about that but I can I can sort of
54:00 evaluate that question right 👀

---

~Ananada~

1. Sacralization of Concepts:
   • [NVL]: Asserts that anything can be sacralized, using examples like free market beliefs and land disputes in the Middle East to illustrate how economic and territorial concepts can take on religious significance. He suggests that sacralizing concepts involves adopting a different “attitude type” towards them.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 While it is true that individuals can attribute sacred value to various concepts, equating these with religious beliefs oversimplifies and potentially misrepresents the nature of genuine spiritual convictions. neoBuddhism recognizes the importance of distinguishing between economic or territorial interests and authentic spiritual values, which are grounded in ethical and philosophical principles rather than mere identity or utility.
2. Economic and Utilitarian Values:
   • [NVL]: Discusses how economic and utilitarian values are typically rational and involve trade-offs, contrasting these with sacred values, which do not follow the same rational principles. 👀
   • Critical Insight: 💭 Economic and utilitarian values are indeed based on presumed rational trade-offs (often incorrectly, leading to worse long-term outcomes) This same reasoning is given before every major economic collapse. [NVL]s claim of “utilitarian it’s pretty rational it it trades things off fairly well” is entirely baseless and his personal assertion. The sacralization of these values can lead to an erosion of ethical principles, where material interests overshadow deeper spiritual and moral commitments. neoBuddhism emphasizes the importance of maintaining a clear distinction between material and spiritual values to prevent the commodification of ethical principles.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

Distinguishing Sacred Values from Economic Interests:
– neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Sacred values are rooted in ethical and philosophical principles that transcend material interests. neoBuddhism emphasizes the importance of recognizing and maintaining this distinction to preserve the integrity of spiritual beliefs and ethical commitments.

Avoiding the Commodification of Ethics:
– neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Sacralizing economic or utilitarian values risks commodifying ethics, reducing deep ethical principles to mere material interests. neoBuddhism advocates for a clear separation between material and spiritual values to uphold the sanctity of ethical and spiritual principles.

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

Type I Error (False Positive):
– Example: Sacralizing economic or utilitarian values, equating them with genuine spiritual beliefs.
– NVL’s Misstep: By suggesting that economic or territorial interests can be sacralized in the same way as religious beliefs, NVL risks committing a Type I error, conflating material interests with authentic spiritual values. 👀

Type II Error (False Negative):
– Example: Overlooking the ethical and spiritual dimensions of genuine religious beliefs by reducing them to mere identity or utility markers.
– NVL’s Misstep: By focusing on the sacralization of economic and utilitarian values, NVL risks a Type II error, neglecting the profound ethical and spiritual dimensions of genuine religious beliefs. 👀

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion on the sacralization of concepts highlights important aspects of how individuals can attribute sacred value to various beliefs. However, his framework risks oversimplifying and misrepresenting the nature of genuine spiritual convictions by equating economic or territorial interests with religious beliefs. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the importance of distinguishing between material and spiritual values, promoting introspection and mindfulness, and avoiding the commodification of ethics. By maintaining a balanced approach, we can appreciate the profound significance of genuine religious beliefs and their role in guiding ethical and spiritual development.

---

whereas if okay is uh is that piece of the cross in
54:07 your living room worth the value of a Year's Netflix subscription now that gives what you
54:14 know is called constitutive incommensurability 👀 it's a different way of valuing things so what the relation
54:22 between religious Credence and sacred values is you can think of people's religious credences as kind of a a map
54:30 layer or transparency that lies on top of their conventional beliefs including their conventional beliefs about the geography of
54:38 uh certain patches of land right so it's not like uh the the cartographers I mean
54:44 aside from where the boundaries are drawn but you know the survey cartographers and and and all all of
54:50 them who uh uh you know chart out where the the mountains are and everyone has
54:55 the same conventional belief about what what the landscape 👀 is you know maybe this river is a little bit wider on one map
55:02 versus the other map so you have um your religious
55:07 narratives are like this transparency that lays on top of it and then what it
55:13 does is it designates certain entities objects events and behaviors as the ones
55:21 that the sacred value system should be attached to 👀 right and one of the features of sacred valuing is uh well
55:29 like I said constitutive incommensurability certain which means that certain trade-offs are taboo and
55:34 they're they're they produce outrage if uh if they're proposed 👀 and then also I
55:40 mean various other things uh like um insensitivity to the probability of
55:46 success so if if a behavior is supposed to you know produce some uh gain in holy
55:51 land or something like that it might be extremely improbable that it would produce any good outcome in that
55:59 direction in an instrumental sense but you might still feel that you have to do it because of your sacred values right
56:06 so sacred values have a a cluster of characteristics that I gathered together
56:12 under the term inviolability um and that you know to combin with religious credences that
56:19 Mark off certain patches of land as the sacred ones and the holy ones in the
56:25 context of certain narratives uh really makes it hard to compromise 👀 I mean there's lots I mean
56:32 here's one way of putting it if if we look at just the amount of space you know it's the uh uh you know Israel plus
56:40 the West Bank Plus Gaza it's not a huge territory but it's big enough it's big
56:46 enough for all the people that are there right so the the problem isn't the that
56:51 of pure utilitarian 👀 I mean that that comes in as well uh but the the fighting
56:57 really comes in due to these uh historical narratives that activate
57:02 sacred values 👀

---

~Ananada~

Concept of Constitutive Incommensurability:
– [NVL]: Introduces the idea of constitutive incommensurability, suggesting that certain values, particularly sacred values, cannot be compared directly with utilitarian values due to their fundamentally different nature. He gives the example of comparing a religious relic with a Netflix subscription. 👀
– Critical Insight: 💭 While it is true that sacred values and utilitarian values operate on different planes, this concept needs further exploration to avoid oversimplifying the complexity of value systems. Which includes the experience of value being personally subjective. neoBuddhism recognizes that sacred values are deeply rooted in ethical and philosophical principles, which transcend simple economic comparisons.

Challenges of Sacred Values in Conflict Resolution:
– [NVL]: Points out that sacred values can make compromise difficult, citing the example of territorial conflicts where land is sacralized. He notes that sacred values can lead to insensitivity to the probability of success and create taboos around certain trade-offs. 👀
– Critical Insight: 💭 Sacred values do indeed play a significant role in conflicts, often making resolution challenging. neoBuddhism promotes understanding and dialogue to bridge the gap between conflicting sacred values, fostering a path toward compassionate and ethical conflict resolution. This also applies to secular contexts, as freedom of speech is a sacred value of the US constitution, thus is not uniquely religious.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

Understanding the Nature of Sacred Values:
– neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Sacred values are deeply rooted in ethical and philosophical principles, transcending simple economic or utilitarian comparisons. neoBuddhism encourages a nuanced understanding of these values, recognizing their integral role in shaping our worldview and guiding our actions.

Integrating Spiritual and Empirical Knowledge:
– neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 The integration of spiritual and empirical knowledge is essential for a holistic understanding of reality. Sacred values should not be seen as mere overlays but as foundational aspects of a comprehensive worldview that includes both empirical and spiritual dimensions.

Promoting Compassionate Conflict Resolution:
– neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Addressing conflicts involving sacred values requires empathy, understanding, and dialogue. neoBuddhism advocates for compassionate conflict resolution, recognizing the profound impact of sacred values on individuals and communities.

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

1. Type I Error (False Positive):
   • Example: Misinterpreting the influence of sacred values as mere economic or utilitarian interests.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By focusing too narrowly on the concept of constitutive incommensurability, NVL risks committing a Type I error, oversimplifying the nature of sacred values and their influence on human behavior. 👀
2. Type II Error (False Negative):
   • Example: Overlooking the ethical and spiritual dimensions of sacred values in conflict resolution.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By not adequately addressing the deeper ethical and spiritual principles underlying sacred values, NVL risks a Type II error, neglecting the importance of these values in fostering compassionate and effective conflict resolution. 👀

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion on constitutive incommensurability and the role of sacred values highlights important aspects of how beliefs influence perception and behavior. However, his framework risks oversimplifying the complexity and depth of sacred values by reducing them to economic or utilitarian comparisons. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the understanding of sacred values as integral aspects of a holistic worldview, promoting the integration of spiritual and empirical knowledge, and advocating for compassionate conflict resolution. By maintaining a balanced approach, we can appreciate the profound significance of sacred values in guiding human behavior and understanding.

---

[MS]sure to the point where if Biden went to either side and said Okay
57:07 I I have a solution I'm getting the checkbook out we're just going to buy all the land and property buildings
57:13 everything and give it to the other side and we'll we'll take care of you in in some other place Madagascar or something
57:19 [NVL]I mean the amount the money we've spent we could you know buy everyone a mansion [MS]I know right yeah be a sacred value that
57:27 you can't put a price on it [NVL]yeah and and uh you know work by Scott atran and colleagues shows that not only is that
57:35 um not going to work uh trying to incentivize violations of sacred values
57:42 actually increases the outrage uh in in at least in certain groups of people
57:48 right 💭so it's like okay I say hey hey Michael I you know I want to have some of your your territory you say no that's
57:55 sacred like well what if I give you a million bucks then you get even more mad right
58:01 so that's that's what I call an incentive outrage only acceptable response is outrage 💭

---

~Ananada~

1. Sacred Values and Outrage:
   • [NVL]: Discusses how attempts to incentivize violations of sacred values can increase outrage, referencing Scott Atran’s work that suggests incentivizing such violations intensifies emotional reactions rather than resolving conflicts.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 Sacred values often hold deep significance and cannot be easily exchanged or negotiated like material goods. neoBuddhism recognizes the profound importance of sacred values and the strong emotional responses they can evoke. However, these responses should be approached with empathy and understanding rather than exacerbating conflict.
2. Outrage as a Response:
   • [NVL]: Asserts that outrage is the only acceptable response to attempts to violate sacred values. He implies that this response is inevitable and justified.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 While outrage can be a natural and justified emotion to perceived violations of sacred values, it is crucial to balance emotional reactions with reasoned arguments and dialogue. neoBuddhism emphasizes the importance of addressing conflicts through compassionate understanding and constructive communication, rather than solely relying on emotional responses.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Balancing Emotional Responses with Constructive Dialogue:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 While outrage is a normal response to perceived violations of sacred values, it should not be the only response. Constructive dialogue and reasoned arguments are essential for resolving conflicts and finding common ground. neoBuddhism encourages a balanced approach that integrates emotional responses with mindful communication and empathy.
2. Understanding Sacred Values:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Sacred values hold deep significance and are often tied to ethical and philosophical principles that transcend material considerations. Recognizing and respecting these values is essential for fostering mutual understanding and resolving conflicts. neoBuddhism promotes a compassionate approach to understanding and addressing sacred values.

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

1. Type I Error (False Positive):
   • Example: Misinterpreting the strong emotional response to violations of sacred values as irrational or unwarranted.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By implying that outrage is the only acceptable response, NVL risks oversimplifying the complex nature of sacred values and their emotional significance. This could lead to a Type I error by failing to recognize the other reasons as well as the interplay of self-control and maturity. Which risks performative outrage that can be trivialized.
2. Type II Error (False Negative):
   • Example: Overlooking the potential for constructive dialogue and reasoned arguments in addressing conflicts involving sacred values.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By emphasizing outrage as the primary response, NVL risks a Type II error by neglecting the importance of constructive communication and compassion in resolving conflicts and addressing sacred values.

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion on sacred values and the emotional responses they evoke highlights the significance of these values in shaping human behavior and conflict. However, his framework risks oversimplifying the complexity of sacred values by suggesting that outrage is the only acceptable response to their violation. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the importance of balancing emotional responses with reasoned arguments and constructive dialogue, promoting a compassionate approach to understanding and addressing sacred values. By maintaining a balanced approach, we can appreciate the profound significance of sacred values in guiding human behavior and resolving conflicts.

---

[MS]yeah yeah yeah so
58:07 remember that uh remember that film indecent Proposal with uht Redford and
58:13 Woody harelson and Demi Moore where Robert Redford plays a billionaire and offers harelson and his wife Demi Mo
58:20 character a million dollars for one night with your wife💭[NVL] right [MS]you know and at first they're like oh c this is just
58:26 and then they're like you know this really could make a difference of course then the rest of the movie she does it it's just sex for her but then it
58:32 becomes more than that because sex is not something it's in that sacred uh
58:38 value realm 💭which is why prostitution is always resisted are always controversial💭
58:44 I mean even even with consenting adults I'm largely libertarian on this front you know whatever consenting adults do
58:50 is none of my business sex work you know that's now the term sex work it's an honorable thing 👌what's wrong with women
58:56 making thousands of dollars or even tens of thousands of dollars a month uh doing this uh there's lots of stories of women
59:02 that put themselves through college easily doing you know camw work or whatever 👀 you know but the push back
59:08 seems to be yeah but they're going to pay for it later you know there's it's the they're corrupting their values
59:15 their character something bad they're going to resent it 💭and i' but I've talked to some women they go no I don't
59:20 resent it thank you very much i' I'd resent working at McDonald's for minimum wage I'd rather be and this 💭you know
59:27 it's like yeah but you know in your 30s you're going to resent what you did in your [NVL]and I don't know it's just like and
59:32 really no I I agree with you but then also from a psychological standpoint
59:38 there is this the the Indecent Proposal movie it does sort of dramatize that
59:44 difference between what I'm calling the utilitarian value system and the uh the sacred value system right 🖖 and it's it's
59:52 creating what uh you know what I think uh you know Philip tetlock would call a
59:57 taboo tradeoff yes yes right where you're trading something sacred right so this you know I mean marriage it it's
1:00:05 surrounded by sacredness even if you're even if you're secular there are these there are these rituals that you go
1:00:11 through and and and bonds and so on and so forth 💭and kind of the whole point of
1:00:18 it and this is where I've been going with my thinking recently of of having religious Credence and all this sacralization is to take you out of the
1:00:26 territory of rational choice right ☝️and that's you know the person who would get
1:00:34 outraged you know and just say hell no I'm not going to take your money is
1:00:40 actually the person who you want by your side when things get really tough right 👀

---

~Ananada~

1. Superficial Examination of Sex Work:
   • [MS] and [NVL]: The discussion on sex work is shallow and primarily focuses on moral outrage without addressing the complex dynamics of the profession, especially in areas where it is legalized. NVL briefly mentions the sacred value realm but does not delve into the ethical, psychological, or social aspects of sex work.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 The conversation reduces the nuanced issues of sex work to a matter of moral outrage and sacred values, without acknowledging the diverse perspectives and lived experiences of those involved. neoBuddhism advocates for a deeper and more compassionate examination of complex social issues, recognizing the importance of understanding and empathy.
2. Sacred Values and Rational Choice:
   • [NVL]: NVL suggests that sacred values, such as those surrounding marriage, are meant to take individuals out of the territory of rational choice, implying that these values create a framework beyond utilitarian calculations. He uses the example of the movie “Indecent Proposal” to illustrate this point.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 While sacred values can indeed transcend rational choice, it is essential to recognize that ethical decision-making often involves a balance between rationality and sacred principles. This markedly ignores the that swinger couples are often religious. Portraying all religious people with his personal preferences. Which is a hallmark of privilege. neoBuddhism emphasizes the integration of rational thought and spiritual wisdom, advocating for decisions that honor both practical realities and ethical convictions.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Nuanced Understanding of Sex Work:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Sex work, like any profession, involves complex dynamics that cannot be reduced to moral outrage or simple binaries. A compassionate and nuanced understanding requires listening to the voices of those involved, considering legal and social frameworks, and addressing issues of dignity, safety, and agency. neoBuddhism promotes a balanced and empathetic approach to social issues, recognizing the importance of addressing underlying causes and respecting individual autonomy.
2. Balancing Sacred Values and Rational Choice:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Sacred values play a crucial role in guiding ethical behavior and fostering a sense of meaning and purpose. However, these values should not completely override rational decision-making. Instead, a balanced approach that integrates spiritual wisdom with practical reasoning can lead to more holistic and ethical outcomes. neoBuddhism encourages mindful decision-making that respects both sacred principles and rational considerations.

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

1. Type I Error (False Positive):
   • Example: Misinterpreting moral outrage as a valid response to all aspects of sex work without considering the complexities involved.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By focusing solely on moral outrage, NVL risks committing a Type I error by oversimplifying the issue and ignoring the diverse experiences and perspectives of those involved in sex work. 👀
2. Type II Error (False Negative):
   • Example: Overlooking the importance of sacred values in ethical decision-making by reducing them to mere emotional reactions.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By suggesting that sacred values take individuals out of the territory of rational choice, NVL risks a Type II error by failing to recognize the need for integrating rationality and sacred principles in ethical decision-making. 👀

Conclusion and Refined Critique

The discussion between Neil Van Leeuwen and Michael Shermer on sex work and sacred values touches on significant ethical issues but falls short of providing a comprehensive and nuanced analysis. By focusing primarily on moral outrage and sacred values, the conversation risks oversimplifying complex social dynamics and ethical considerations. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the importance of understanding and empathy, advocating for a balanced approach that integrates rational thought and spiritual wisdom. By maintaining a holistic view, we can better address the complexities of social issues and make ethical decisions that honor both practical realities and sacred principles.

---

[MS]yeah you can't be bought off [NVL]yeah yeah 💭
1:00:48 and and so the having of religious credences is kind of a way of uh really
1:00:56 what you might call Strategic irrationality or or purposeful irrationality where uh it's putting you
1:01:03 in a space where you can be a trusted staunch ingroup member right because
1:01:08 you're willing to Bear these bear these costs and and so on right so it's like you wouldn't you know you wouldn't
1:01:15 really want someone who uh could you know just Peter Singer like engage in
1:01:22 the uh uh you know the payoffs and so on 👀 and so forth [MS]calculus [NVL]yeah yeah yeah I mean but I mean I agree with you like
1:01:28 look I I you know I go to a massage therapist and it's you know in terms of the physical interaction I mean okay we
1:01:35 don't you know we don't engage in any sexual touching but he this guy has his hands all over my body and I give him
1:01:41 135 bucks at the end right like yeah like why is why would prostitution be so
1:01:48 much so much worse than that right 👀 and and people can't really explain it right 👀
1:01:54 and cuz it's not the sort of thing that you're supposed to be able to explain 👀 [MS]well like if your spouse asked you you
1:02:00 know why do you love me if you Quantified it well cuz you know you're an eight and a half on a scale of 1 to
1:02:05 10 and you're this funny and you're that intelligent it kind of implies well if I find somebody who's a nine out of 10 and
1:02:12 is is 10 points more intelligent than you or whatever I might just abandon you and go for this other one 👀right whereas
1:02:19 the other answer is you know it's just because you are you in some kind of Airy
1:02:24 fairy you know I don't I'm just in love with you you're the perfect person for me there is no number to put on it 👀 [NVL]yeah
1:02:31 yeah so this is the game theorists would kind of make the point in in roughly the following way there are certain things
1:02:39 that can't be gotten by being rational right and a a a bond with other people
1:02:48 that uh you can really trust and rely on is kind of of that nature whether it's
1:02:54 with an individual as in an marriage 👀 or as in a group with a religion all right
1:03:01 so the question is here's here's one way of seeing what's going on with religious
1:03:06 activity right it's a way on the one hand of signaling but on the other hand a way of
1:03:12 inculcating the disposition to be irrational you know not under the sphere
1:03:18 of rational Choice uh in the right circumstances and in the right contexts 💭
1:03:25 right the religious rituals they inculcate certain emotions or emotional
1:03:31 dispositions uh that would render you irrational in a way that makes you a
1:03:36 trust trustworthy group member 👀 all the while you can still you know seven six
1:03:42 days a week till the fields and and irrigate things and be super empirical right 💭

---

~Ananada~

1. Concept of “Strategic Irrationality”:
   • [NVL]: NVL discusses the idea of “strategic irrationality” as a way to establish trust within a group, suggesting that religious credences serve this function.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 While it’s true that shared rituals and beliefs can strengthen group cohesion, equating this with strategic irrationality risks trivializing deeply held spiritual convictions, while this behavior is more akin to conspiracies of silence. neoBuddhism emphasizes the integration of rationality and spirituality, where beliefs and practices are grounded in both empirical understanding and spiritual insight.
2. Trivialization of Relationships and Values:
   • [MS] and [NVL]: The comparison between massage therapy and sex work, as well as the discussion on quantifying love, trivializes complex human relationships and the values underpinning them.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 Relationships and values are not merely transactional. Genuine connections are based on mutual respect, understanding, and shared values. Reducing them to simplistic comparisons undermines the depth and significance of these bonds. neoBuddhism values authentic connections and ethical relationships, recognizing the importance of both rational and emotional components.
3. Anti-Intellectualism and Incommensurability:
   • [NVL]: The suggestion that not being able to articulate preferences or beliefs is somehow more authentic reflects anti-intellectualism and abuse of incommensurability.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 Authenticity in relationships and beliefs involves a balance of emotional depth and intellectual clarity. The inability to articulate does not inherently signify authenticity, and promoting such a view can lead to dishonesty and superficiality. neoBuddhism encourages both clarity of thought and depth of feeling, advocating for a holistic approach to understanding and expressing values.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Balancing Rationality and Spirituality:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 True wisdom involves harmonizing rationality with spirituality. Beliefs and practices should be rooted in both empirical evidence and spiritual insight, fostering a balanced and integrated approach to life. This balance enhances both personal and communal well-being.
2. Valuing Authentic Relationships:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Relationships are built on mutual respect, understanding, and shared values. Authentic connections are not merely transactional or superficial but involve deep emotional and intellectual engagement. Recognizing and nurturing these aspects leads to more fulfilling and ethical relationships.
3. Promoting Intellectual and Emotional Clarity:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Intellectual clarity and emotional depth are both essential for authentic living. Being able to articulate preferences and beliefs enhances understanding and honesty, while emotional depth ensures that these expressions are meaningful and genuine. neoBuddhism advocates for the cultivation of both aspects.

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

1. Type I Error (False Positive):
   • Example: Misinterpreting inarticulate expressions as inherently more authentic or valuable.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By suggesting that inarticulate expressions are more authentic, NVL risks committing a Type I error by incorrectly valuing superficial authenticity over genuine understanding and clarity.
2. Type II Error (False Negative):
   • Example: Overlooking the importance of balancing rationality and spirituality in belief systems.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By focusing on strategic irrationality, NVL risks a Type II error by failing to acknowledge the need for integrating rational thought and spiritual insight in forming and practicing beliefs.

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen and Michael Shermer’s discussion on strategic irrationality, relationships, and values touches on significant aspects of human behavior but often falls into the trap of trivializing complex issues. By equating deeply held spiritual convictions with strategic irrationality and reducing relationships to transactional comparisons, the conversation risks oversimplifying and undermining the depth of human experience. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the integration of rationality and spirituality, the value of authentic relationships, and the importance of both intellectual clarity and emotional depth. By maintaining a balanced and holistic view, we can better understand and navigate the complexities of human behavior and belief systems.

---

so that's that's kind of where I'm
1:03:49 I I don't quite put it that way so much in the book but that's that's where I'm headed uh with thinking about this
1:03:56 [MS]examples of these sacred value violations Woody Allen's line um he holds up his wrist with the watch on it
1:04:02 he says my grandfather on his deathbed sold me his watch it's like wait what
1:04:09 [NVL]right right [MS]and then uh the psychiatrist Sally satel I don't know if you know her work but she does a lot of work on um
1:04:15 organ donations she herself is a recipient of a uh kidney
1:04:20 um yeah kidney and and so she's campaigns for this because there's a lot
1:04:26 of people that have extra kidneys that they don't don't need the second one and they could help and there's a long line
1:04:32 of people and there's just not enough you know these motorcycle accidents and so on uh but the biggest resistance is
1:04:39 something like it's just you can't put a price on organs and and then you know
1:04:44 poor people would be taken advantage of and you know that kind of thing yeah 👀

[NVL] so
1:04:49 I do think yeah with with bodily autonomy that is that is treated as sacred
1:04:56 right and I think there are I think there are um you know if if we I you
1:05:03 know again I'm not so religiously inclined myself but I do think
1:05:08 that you know having certain things be regarded as a sacred value or or your
1:05:14 sacred value system attaches attaches to them uh it does um kind of one allow us
1:05:23 to have common guard rails as a society and then it also again it allows you to
1:05:31 have a bond with another person that you wouldn't otherwise be able to have because you can just be totally
1:05:38 confident that certain things are off limit and they'll be there in certain certain circumstances right and you just
1:05:43 don't arrive at that kind of predicament through pure rational choice 👀 and
1:05:48 empirical thinking [MS]right right[NVL] yeah so I'm not you know I'm I'm not uh it's
1:05:55 it's it's a tension right because you're you're sort of pre-commit yourself to
1:06:01 being irrational when the time comes👀

---

~Ananada~

1. Sacred Values and Social Guardrails:
   • [NVL]: NVL suggests that sacred values provide common societal guardrails and foster bonds that pure rational choice cannot achieve.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 While sacred values can indeed strengthen social cohesion and moral boundaries, the idea of pre-committing to irrationality for the sake of these values is problematic. neoBuddhism emphasizes a integration of rationality and spirituality, advocating for ethical principles that are both deeply held and empirically informed. The law serves as a societal guardrail, reflecting a collective rational agreement on ethics and morality.
2. Transactional Relationships and the Law:
   • [MS]: references to transactional relationships and the role of the law highlights the tension in NVL’s argument.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 The law is designed to provide objective and enforceable standards of behavior, reducing the need for purely sacred or irrational commitments. Genuine ethical behavior stems from an understanding and internalization of these standards, not from arbitrary or irrational adherence to sacred values. neoBuddhism supports the development of laws and ethical standards that are informed by both empirical evidence and compassionate wisdom.
3. Irrationality and Pre-Commitment:
   • [NVL]: NVL’s notion of pre-committing to irrationality in specific circumstances is akin to game theory’s prisoners dilemma, where mutual cooperation is enforced through implicit agreements.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 This perspective risks promoting moral relativism and undermining the foundation of rational ethical behavior. neoBuddhism emphasizes the importance of consistent ethical principles that guide behavior in all circumstances, avoiding the pitfalls of situational ethics that can justify harmful actions.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Integration of Rationality and Spirituality:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Ethical behavior should be grounded in both rational understanding and spiritual insight. Sacred values should not be used to justify irrational behavior but should be integrated with rational principles to create a cohesive and ethical society.
2. Role of the Law:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 The law provides a rational framework for societal behavior, promoting fairness and justice. Sacred values can complement this framework by fostering deeper personal and communal commitments to ethical behavior, but they should not override rational principles.
3. Consistent Ethical Principles:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Ethical behavior should be guided by consistent principles that apply in all situations. Pre-committing to irrationality risks justifying harmful actions and undermining trust. A balanced approach that integrates rationality and spirituality ensures ethical consistency and fosters genuine trust.

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

1. Type I Error (False Positive):
   • Example: Justifying irrational behavior through sacred values.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By suggesting that pre-committing to irrationality can strengthen group bonds, NVL risks committing a Type I error by accepting irrational behavior as valid in certain contexts. This undermines the foundation of rational ethical principles. 👀
2. Type II Error (False Negative):
   • Example: Overlooking the role of rationality in ethical behavior.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By not adequately integrating rationality with sacred values, NVL risks a Type II error, failing to acknowledge the importance of rational principles in guiding ethical behavior. 👀

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion on sacred values, social guardrails, and the role of irrationality touches on important aspects of human behavior and societal cohesion. However, the idea of pre-committing to irrationality for the sake of sacred values is problematic and risks promoting moral relativism. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the integration of rationality and spirituality, the importance of the law as a rational framework for ethical behavior, and the need for consistent ethical principles. By maintaining a balanced and holistic view, we can better understand and navigate the complexities of human behavior and belief systems, ensuring ethical consistency and fostering genuine trust.

---

[MS] right and then the kindled human and
1:06:06 social relations where for example I go to a restaurant and pay for my meal but
1:06:12 if I go to my friend's house for dinner I I don't offer to pay it would be rude
1:06:18 in fact he'd be insulted👀 but on the other hand there's a little reciprocity there if my if my friends have this over
1:06:24 three or four times in a row and we never invite them over you know they're going to go what is wrong with the shermers 💭
1:06:30 how come how come they never invite us to their house and then at some point they're not going to invit us anymore so there's some reciprocity there [NVL]yeah it's
1:06:38 it's there's you know I think this is one of the things I I've been focused more on the cognitive side of religious
1:06:45 belief like what are the cognitive dynamics of of religious credences how they're like imagining uh and also the
1:06:50 interplays between conventional belief and religious Credence right 👀 so so there's there's you know we didn't didn't get
1:06:56 into that but there's a lot of ways in which conventional beliefs are are foundational in relation to religious credences like when you choose to have a
1:07:03 religious Credence it's because you conventionally believe that that's what the religion quires requires🤏 of you right
1:07:10 well that conventional belief could be shared by an atheist right I know what religion requires of people but it's there's this
1:07:17 sort of governance relation so there's all sorts of interesting interplays between just like between imaginings and
1:07:22 conventional beliefs between religious credences and conventional beliefs 👀

so I'm f focused mostly on those cognitive Dynamics but there's also just uh
1:07:30 something I because I only dedicate one chapter to it just a wealth of interactions between sacred values and
1:07:37 ordinary utilitarian values right where certain face saving gestures will allow
1:07:44 you to satisfy a a sacred value 👀 for for very little cost right and it's it's the the
1:07:53 stuff like that that is is uh is super interesting I mean this is what this is what Scott atran works on he's trying to
1:08:00 help you know he's great Anthropologist great a cognitive scientist of religion
1:08:05 uh and he's he's also been engaged in trying to help governments think how to deal with sacred values better uh but
1:08:12 gosh you know I wish people would would you know just embrace the value of apology once in a while because you can
1:08:20 doesn't cost I mean you know in in in a real way it doesn't it doesn't cost any money 👀 um but yeah maybe maybe uh a later
1:08:28 book I'll try to try to handle the interaction [MS]always got to save uh you always got to save the last chapter that
1:08:33 was going to make your book too long for the next book that's what I always do okay my favorite chapter in your book the puzzle of religious rationality so
1:08:41 let's [NVL]yeah it's one of my favorites too

---

~Ananada~

1. Social Reciprocity and Cognitive Dynamics:
   • [MS]: Discusses social reciprocity in the context of informal social gatherings, such as dinner parties, and how these social norms influence relationships.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 While MS accurately portrays the social dynamics of reciprocity, NVL’s interpretation that attempting to pay for a meal at a friend’s house would be offensive is strange. Reciprocity in social relationships is nuanced and context-dependent, reflecting a deeper understanding of mutual respect and shared experiences. neoBuddhism emphasizes understanding the intentions and context behind actions, rather than adhering strictly to perceived social norms.
2. Cognitive Dynamics of Religious Belief:
   • [NVL]: Claims to focus on the cognitive dynamics of religious credences and their interplay with conventional beliefs, suggesting that choosing a religious credence is based on conventional beliefs about religious requirements.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 NVL’s perspective on the cognitive dynamics of religious belief seems inconsistent with his earlier claims that conflate religious credence with identity politics. Genuine religious beliefs involve a complex interplay of personal experience, cultural context, and philosophical understanding. neoBuddhism encourages a holistic approach to understanding belief systems, integrating empirical knowledge with spiritual insight.
3. Sacred Values and Utilitarian Values:
   • [NVL]: Discusses the interaction between sacred values and utilitarian values, suggesting that certain gestures can satisfy sacred values at little cost.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 While recognizing the value of symbolic gestures, it’s important to avoid reducing sacred values to mere social utilities. Sacred values represent deeply held convictions that go beyond utilitarian calculations. neoBuddhism emphasizes the profound significance of sacred values and their role in guiding ethical behavior and fostering genuine connections.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Nuanced Understanding of Reciprocity:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Social reciprocity is not merely transactional but involves a deep understanding of mutual respect and shared experiences. neoBuddhism encourages mindful awareness of the intentions and context behind actions, fostering genuine connections.
2. Holistic Approach to Cognitive Dynamics:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Genuine religious beliefs are complex and multifaceted, involving personal experience, cultural context, and philosophical understanding. A holistic approach integrates empirical knowledge with spiritual insight, promoting a deeper understanding of belief systems.
3. Respecting Sacred Values:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Sacred values represent deeply held convictions that guide ethical behavior and foster genuine connections. They should not be reduced to mere social utilities or transactional gestures. neoBuddhism emphasizes the profound significance of sacred values and their role in promoting ethical behavior.

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

1. Type I Error (False Positive):
   • Example: Reducing sacred values to mere social utilities.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By suggesting that sacred values can be satisfied with minimal gestures, NVL risks committing a Type I error by oversimplifying deeply held beliefs and their significance.
2. Type II Error (False Negative):
   • Example: Ignoring the profound significance of sacred values.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By not adequately recognizing the deep significance of sacred values, NVL risks a Type II error, failing to acknowledge the importance of these values in guiding ethical behavior.

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion on social reciprocity, cognitive dynamics of religious belief, and the interaction between sacred and utilitarian values touches on important aspects of human behavior and belief systems. However, his perspective risks oversimplifying and trivializing deeply held convictions. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes a nuanced understanding of social reciprocity, a holistic approach to cognitive dynamics, and the profound significance of sacred values. By maintaining a balanced and holistic view, we can better understand and navigate the complexities of human behavior and belief systems, ensuring ethical consistency and fostering genuine trust.

---

[MS]yeah how to square that Circle people are clearly rational as we've been
1:08:47 saying 👌 and um you know Hugo mer also makes his point you know most people are pretty rational most of them don't fall
1:08:53 for Cults is my favorite part of it that that book you know that we only hear about the ones that joined Jonestown and
1:08:59 went to Guyana or they joined the heavens gate and drank the or ate the
1:09:05 ate the pie the Marie calendar pie or whatever and all that stuff but you know the vast majority of people who went to
1:09:11 one of the seminars or whatever they just never returned um you know I I love this subject because he's I spent my
1:09:17 whole career just thinking about how irrational people are cuz that's all I deal with is crazy beliefs 👀 you know but
1:09:22 in fact most people keep gas in the tank 👌 and they take the kids to school and they got food in the fridge and they
1:09:28 keep their jobs and they go about their daily lives perfectly rational 👀

---

~Ananada~

1. Perception of Rationality:
   • [MS]: Sarcastically asserts that people are clearly rational, highlighting the contradiction between rational daily activities and participation in irrational or harmful beliefs.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 This highlights the duality in human behavior where individuals can be rational in daily tasks but still hold irrational beliefs. neoBuddhism emphasizes the importance of mindfulness and discernment to navigate this duality, promoting a balanced and coherent approach to understanding human behavior.
2. Cults and Rationality:
   • [MS]: Discusses the perception of cults, noting that while the majority of people avoid them, the focus is often on the few who fall for them.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 The focus on extreme cases like cults can skew our understanding of general human behavior. Most people do exhibit rational behavior in their daily lives, despite holding some irrational or unexamined beliefs. neoBuddhism encourages looking beyond sensational examples to understand the broader patterns of human behavior.
3. Daily Rationality and Underlying Irrationality:
   • [MS]: Notes that most people maintain rational behavior in daily tasks, such as keeping gas in the tank and taking care of their families.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 This juxtaposition highlights the complexity of human cognition, where practical rationality coexists with underlying irrational beliefs. Though it also hints that habitual behaviors do not require rationality due to the automaticity. Most of the “rationality” that human engage in on a daily basis, is embedded in the technology, like how Microwave ovens will not activate without first closing the door, and most other safety features on products. neoBuddhism promotes a holistic understanding that integrates practical rationality with deeper introspection and ethical mindfulness.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Mindfulness in Daily Life:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 neoBuddhism encourages mindfulness in all aspects of life, recognizing that daily tasks should be complemented by critical self-examination of underlying beliefs, because they generally do not require rationality. Safety features exist because of how common irrationality and ignorance is in humans. A holistic approach fosters a more coherent and integrated understanding of the world.
2. Critical Examination of Beliefs:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 It’s important to critically examine one’s beliefs and motivations, even those that seem rational on the surface. neoBuddhism teaches that true wisdom arises from the integration of empirical knowledge with ethical and spiritual insight, avoiding the pitfalls of purely surface-level rationality.
3. Holistic Understanding of Rationality and Irrationality:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Acknowledging the coexistence of rational and irrational aspects of human behavior allows for a more compassionate and comprehensive understanding of oneself and others. neoBuddhism promotes an approach that balances practical rationality with deeper ethical and spiritual awareness.

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

1. Type I Error (False Positive):
   • Example: Believing that surface-level rational behavior equates to overall rationality.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By focusing on the apparent rationality in daily tasks, NVL risks a Type I error by overestimating the rationality of individuals, ignoring underlying irrational behaviors. 👀
2. Type II Error (False Negative):
   • Example: Dismissing the rational aspects of daily behavior due to underlying irrational beliefs.
   • NVL’s Misstep: Conversely, focusing too much on irrational beliefs might lead to a Type II error, underestimating the rational behavior that individuals exhibit in their daily lives. Assuming that a small number of irrational beliefs in areas that are rarely encountered, would impact all decision making. 👀

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion with [MS] highlights the complexity of human rationality, juxtaposing rational daily behavior with underlying irrational beliefs. While NVL attempts to explore this duality, his analysis risks oversimplifying human cognition by focusing too much on identity politics and virtue signaling. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the integration of practical rationality with deeper ethical and spiritual awareness, promoting a holistic understanding of human behavior. By maintaining a balanced view, we can better appreciate the nuances of rational and irrational aspects of cognition, fostering a more compassionate and comprehensive approach to understanding ourselves and others.

---

you know so there's a little bit of an
1:09:34 availability heuristic you know like the the Tinder swindler 👀 is my other favorite example if you saw that Netflix
1:09:40 series um this was a guy who was scamming women out of money and he targeted women in their like mid to late
1:09:45 30s who are looking for true love this is it you get married have kids and so on and then he posts a picture of him on
1:09:53 his little Tinder page there next to a private jet like oh my God handsome guy oh my God you know so of course they
1:09:59 swipe right or left or whichever the right one is uh and they go out with him and he's they're actually on the jet I
1:10:05 mean he's got the jet there he is there they go to this island and they have a you know five star resort it's the most
1:10:11 romantic weekend of all time and this goes on and on and on for months and he's he's like this mysterious man
1:10:17 international Man of Mystery you know and and then all of a sudden he like I'm going to Switzerland this this weekend for this big business thing you know I'm
1:10:24 going to close this deal it's be worth like like $20 million and then the the the the big move he calls them like on a
1:10:30 Saturday I need like $50,000 tomorrow you of course I you know I have millions
1:10:36 just going to be I'll pay wire it back to you on Monday but can you wire me the money now today and then that's the move
1:10:43 that's the moment do they go for it or not and that may be a little high maybe it was 10,000 initially or 20,000 or
1:10:49 however much he thought they had and then of course the show features the ones that went for it right but what we
1:10:55 knows what's the base rate how many did he try you know one out of a 100 fell for it or
1:11:01 whatever 👀 [NVL]yeah yeah okay so so in that case I think the the ones who went for
1:11:06 it they were genuinely tricked right yeah and and so that's that would be
1:11:13 probably an example of just a false conventional belief 👀 uh but not not an
1:11:20 irrational one 👀 I mean one of the things that's that's distinctive about this or or or maybe not distinctive but but
1:11:27 noteworthy is that he produced a whole lot of evidence to fool um all right
1:11:33 and he and he he made the evidence experiential 👀 okay so he made it highly
1:11:39 plausible that now you know you do have to be a g be honest a bit of a fool but
1:11:45 you you the there was a whole lot of evidence in favor of conventionally believing👀
1:11:50 uh that this person was a legit millionaire [MS]oh they showed hundreds of text women had
1:11:56 on their phones, you know I love you you're the one true this I finally met we're going to have babies this it just went and on
1:12:03 for months [NVL]right yeah so that might have that might have dialed in addition to
1:12:08 the experiential uh uh demonstration you know evidence of the man being rich there was
1:12:15 also the dialing down of the skepticism right through the through the emotional means👀 [MS] um yeah[NVL] well I think let me say
1:12:22 what I think is is striking about this I think that not what's going on uh with
1:12:27 with religious belief most of the time right 👀 so it's it's not just that the religious text have have you know fooled
1:12:35 people into thinking there's a talking snake right or something like or or that
1:12:40 you know leprosy could be cured or that you know take take the various florid pantheons like Ganesha right body of a
1:12:47 boy head of an elephant right it's not like there was this all this evidence
1:12:53 that there is such a being uh aside from you know the religious texts uh which are you know very
1:13:00 mythological in character right and so you've got this kind of contrast between
1:13:07 what we might say the apparent rationality of human beings who can learn to use a computer learn to drive a
1:13:15 car learn a trade learn at least the basics of mathematics right neurotypical
1:13:20 people these this is all this is all normal stuff and if if you think about it it's like well learn learn some facts
1:13:26 about history from hundreds of years ago uh none of that would be possible without substantial levels of epistemic
1:13:33 rationality but then you look at these religious beliefs right like florid

---

~Ananada~

1. Availability Heuristic:
   • [MS]: Highlights the availability heuristic bias, exemplified by the Netflix series “The Tinder Swindler,” where women were scammed by a man posing as a wealthy individual.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 This example illustrates how cognitive biases, such as the availability heuristic, can lead individuals to overestimate the prevalence and significance of sensational cases. neoBuddhism emphasizes the importance of mindfulness and critical thinking to recognize and mitigate these biases.
2. Nature of Romance Scams:
   • [MS]: Points out that romance scams, like the one depicted in the series, are common, but most do not involve wealthy targets or extensive face-to-face interactions. https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/data-visualizations/data-spotlight/2023/02/romance-scammers-favorite-lies-exposed
   • Critical Insight: 💭 Romance scams exploit common psychological vulnerabilities and overconfidence in one’s emotional intelligence. neoBuddhism advocates for a balanced approach, combining emotional awareness with rational discernment to protect against such deceptions.
3. Genuine Deception and False Belief:
   • [NVL]: Argues that the victims of the Tinder Swindler were genuinely tricked, resulting in false beliefs rather than irrationality, due to the convincing evidence presented by the scammer.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 While it’s true that the scammer provided plausible evidence, it also highlights the importance of skepticism and critical evaluation of claims, even when they seem convincing. neoBuddhism encourages vigilance and questioning of appearances to avoid falling prey to deceit.
4. Overconfidence in Emotional Intelligence:
   • Critical Insight: 💭 The example also reveals a common overconfidence in emotional intelligence, particularly among those who may perceive themselves as better judges of character. neoBuddhism teaches humility and self-awareness, recognizing the limitations of one’s own judgment and the potential for deception.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Balancing Emotional and Rational Awareness:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 neoBuddhism promotes a integration of emotional intelligence with rational awareness. By cultivating mindfulness, individuals can better navigate social interactions and protect themselves from manipulation.
2. Critical Evaluation of Evidence:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 It’s crucial to critically evaluate evidence and remain skeptical of too-good-to-be-true scenarios. This aligns with the Buddhist practice of discernment, or Skepticism in the case of [MS], encouraging individuals to question and investigate rather than accept things at face value.
3. Humility and Self-Awareness:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Recognizing the potential for overconfidence and cognitive biases fosters humility and self-awareness. neoBuddhism teaches that true wisdom arises from acknowledging one’s limitations and striving for continuous self-improvement.

Integrating Type I and Type II Errors

1. Type I Error (False Positive):
   • Example: Believing the Tinder Swindler’s claims of wealth and status without sufficient skepticism.
   • NVL’s Misstep: By focusing on the plausibility of the scammer’s evidence, NVL may overlook the importance of maintaining skepticism, leading to a Type I error. 👀
2. Type II Error (False Negative):
   • Example: Dismissing genuine romantic interests due to overgeneralizing the risk of scams.
   • NVL’s Misstep: Overemphasizing the risk of deception can lead to a Type II error, where genuine connections are rejected out of fear or mistrust, but attending the entrapment circus on a gamble would be a type 1 error. 👀

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion with [MS] explores the complexities of deception and cognitive biases, exemplified by the Tinder Swindler case. While NVL’s analysis highlights the role of plausible evidence in creating false beliefs, it underscores the need for critical thinking and skepticism. A neoBuddhist perspective advocates for a balanced approach, integrating emotional intelligence with rational discernment, fostering humility, and maintaining vigilance against deception. By embracing these principles, individuals can better navigate social interactions and protect themselves from manipulation, while also fostering genuine connections based on trust and awareness.

What is a romance scam (and what types are there)? 

A romance scam, also known as an online dating scam, is when a person gets tricked into believing they’re in a romantic relationship with someone they met online, when in fact their other half is a cybercriminal using a fake identity to gain enough of their trust to ask — or blackmail — them for money. 

Some of the most common internet dating scams include:

• Fake dating sites: Scam dating sites claim to be legitimate but are actually filled with scammers or underpopulated. These websites are created to mine your information.         
• Photo scams: Scammers will convince their target to send their personal information in exchange for intimate photos.         
• Military romance scams: The scammer will pose as a military member, likely deployed. They build trust by using military jargon and titles, then ask for money to cover military-related expenses, such as flights home.
• Intimate activity scams: The scammer connects with their target on multiple social media websites. Once they become closer, the scammer convinces them to undress and then threatens them with the recordings.
• Code verification scams: Scammers will send a fake verification code through email or text, posing to be a dating app or website. Once clicked on, it will ask for their personal information, including Social Security number and credit cards.         
• Inheritance scams: Scammers will make their target believe they need to get married in order to get their inheritance. In this case, they will ask them to help pay for something like airfare.         
• Malware scams: Malware is also common on dating sites. In this case, the recipient will interact with a scammer who sends them a website that looks legitimate; however, it’s a page that includes malware.
• Sugar daddy scams: In this type of romance scam, a scammer will pose as a wealthy individual looking to send money to a younger person in exchange for online companionship. Once they build your trust, they’ll ask for an upfront fee or personal information before sending your allowance.

---

and so you've got this kind of contrast between
1:13:07 what we might say the apparent rationality of human beings who can learn to use a computer learn to drive a
1:13:15 car learn a trade learn at least the basics of mathematics right neurotypical
1:13:20 people these this is all this is all normal stuff and if if you think about it it's like well learn learn some facts
1:13:26 about history from hundreds of years ago uh none of that would be possible without substantial levels of epistemic
1:13:33 rationality but then you look at these religious beliefs right like florid
1:13:38 Pantheon deities you know take axolotl right uh a snake with feathers that
1:13:44 flies around in Nal religion okay so there's there's all these things that
1:13:49 appear to flout reason uh one of again to to go back to to one of Dan Spur's examples when he was he was um among the
1:13:57 dors in Ethiopia uh they were uh Christian and they maintained that
1:14:03 leopards were also Christian and so they would the leopards would fast on Christian days right and like no you
1:14:10 know if you actually thought that was true you'd have to be pretty irrational 👀 so the puzzle of religious rationality
1:14:17 as I lay it out is how do you square the apparent epistemic rationality of humans
1:14:24 including the majority of religious humans with the apparent irrationality
1:14:29 of the apparent religious beliefs 👀 right or or of of the the religious beliefs
1:14:35 all right and there's there's different ways of trying to do it one you you could say well look the religious folks
1:14:42 not rational after all that's kind of the the the the delusion thing right 👀 and that it's not just um you know people
1:14:49 like like Dawkins it's Freud says things along these lines and um in earlier days
1:14:55 friend of mine Ryan McKai uh he does a lot of psychology in cognitive science of religion uh he had um uh this paper I
1:15:04 think it was in 2004 called hallucinating God or God yeah I think it was hallucinating God right and so he
1:15:10 argues that that religious beliefs are delusions 👀 so basically what your your solution there is to say hey yeah the
1:15:19 religious beliefs are irrational and so are the people poof problem solved problem is that's why false right like
1:15:26 it's you know the vast majority of religious people aren't aren't delusional or crazy irrational on the flip side you've got
1:15:34 the religious apologists who try to argue that the religious beliefs are rational right 👀 and that's I mean I don't
1:15:39 really even take that solution seriously right it's more to me that's more of a charade 👀 and even if it worked for one
1:15:47 religion it would leave you know all the other religions out out in the cold 👀

---

~Ananada~

1. Contrast Between Rationality and Religious Belief:
   • [NVL]: Highlights the contrast between humans’ seeming rationality in learning and practical skills and the seemingly irrational nature of some religious beliefs, such as the idea that leopards would fast on Christian days.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 Many beliefs that appear irrational may not significantly impact daily life or practical decisions. neoBuddhism recognizes the role of symbolic and metaphorical beliefs in providing cultural and psychological meaning.
2. Belief in Anthropomorphized Animals:
   • [NVL]: Uses the example of Christians in Ethiopia believing leopards also fast on Christian days to illustrate what he sees as irrational religious beliefs.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 Such beliefs often stem from symbolic thinking rather than empirical observation. They can serve to reinforce cultural cohesion and shared identity rather than reflect literal truth. neoBuddhism values the metaphorical and symbolic aspects of religious narratives for their psychological and cultural significance.
3. Religious Rationality and Delusions:
   • [NVL]: Discusses the perspectives of Freud, Dawkins, and others who view religious beliefs as delusions. He contrasts this with religious apologists who argue for the rationality of religious beliefs.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 neoBuddhism emphasizes a balanced view, recognizing that while some religious beliefs may seem irrational, they often fulfill important psychological and social functions. A common description of religious beliefs is that they are metaphorically true. Labeling all religious beliefs as delusions dismisses their complex roles in human experience.
4. False Dichotomy Between Rational and Irrational Beliefs:
   • [NVL]: Suggests that labeling religious beliefs as either entirely rational or entirely irrational is overly simplistic.
   • Critical Insight: 💭 This false dichotomy overlooks the nuanced ways in which beliefs operate. neoBuddhism teaches that beliefs can serve multiple purposes, including providing moral guidance, fostering community, and offering existential comfort. These purposes transcend simple categories of rationality. As demonstrated by Metaphors that can usefully guide rational behavior without being literally true

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

1. Symbolic and Metaphorical Understanding:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Many religious beliefs are symbolic or metaphorical rather than literal. They serve to express deeper truths about human experience and moral values, and the limits of empirical measurement. Recognizing this distinction helps to appreciate the richness of religious traditions without dismissing them as entirely irrational.
2. Psychological and Social Functions of Belief:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 Religious beliefs often play crucial roles in psychological well-being and social cohesion. They provide frameworks for understanding the world, coping with existential questions, and building community. These functions are valuable even if the beliefs are not empirically verifiable.
3. Balanced View of Rationality:
   • neoBuddhist Insight: 💭 A balanced view acknowledges that humans possess both rational and symbolic modes of thinking. neoBuddhism encourages integrating these modes, understanding that beliefs can be both practically beneficial and symbolically meaningful.

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion touches on the complexities of religious belief and rationality, using examples like the Ethiopian belief in fasting leopards to illustrate perceived irrationality. However, this analysis overlooks the symbolic and metaphorical nature of many religious beliefs and their psychological and social functions. A neoBuddhist perspective recognizes the multifaceted roles of belief systems, emphasizing the importance of symbolic understanding and the balanced integration of rational and symbolic thinking. By appreciating these nuances, we can better understand the value of religious beliefs in human experience.

---

all right so the trying to you know increase
1:15:55 the rationality of the religious beliefs or decrease the rationality of humans that adjusting of the rationality it
1:16:01 doesn't really work ✋ another approach is to to kind of say that the contents
1:16:07 aren't really what they appear to be right like durkheim says religious beliefs are really about Society but it
1:16:13 then it does leave you with a puzzle of well what about the surface level meaning that people appear to take real
1:16:19 seriously and also what differentiates the you know atheist who likes the
1:16:25 stories from the religious Believers 💭 right so so this is a whole different approach for me to come at what I call
1:16:32 the the attitude solution which is to say yeah religious Believers are actually taking
1:16:39 a different attitude from conventional belief uh toward their religious stories and
1:16:45 doctrines at least characteristically one that allows the ordinary day-to-day epistemic
1:16:52 rationality of their conventional belief uncompromised 👀 right so this is I don't
1:16:59 call it a transcendental argument or or something like that if you like ☝️if you like the Kantian speak for why we should
1:17:06 posit a different attitude of religious Credence it it allows us to make sense
1:17:11 of how uh otherwise rational people👀 could quote unquote believe all these
1:17:19 outlandish contents right about supernatural agents and events and and
1:17:24 res resurrections and and uh you know human bodies mixed with animals and so
1:17:30 on they're taking an attitude more like imagining 👀 albeit imagining that is made
1:17:36 serious by its connection to Sacred value and group identity right so that's that's my solution to the puzzle it's
1:17:42 it's it's kind of similar to to what you say in your your your conspiracy book I think with with proxy uh conspiracism so

1:17:49 [MS]what's wrong with Steve Gould's Noma principle non-overlapping magisteria which he developed largely after after
1:17:55 the pope said it's okay for Catholics to believe in the theory of evolution but we get the soul and G says yeah okay you
1:18:01 can have the soul we don't do that anyway these are non-overlapping Magister what's wrong with that argument 💭
1:18:06 [NVL]well I think I think it's um it's mistaken because it makes it sound like the contents of religious beliefs and
1:18:15 the contents of science are never going to conflict they're not overlapping magisteria and and it maybe for some
1:18:22 clusters of religious beliefs that's true Maybe they don't but I mean there's
1:18:28 all sorts of conflict right if you're if you're a young Earth creationist or or any um any Doctrine about the immaterial
1:18:36 soul uh controlling your actions it's contrary to the laws of physics ☝️right it
1:18:42 you know uh uh the physical world is a closed system ☝️and so uh it just wouldn't
1:18:49 be possible for an immaterial soul to to be guiding my actions right now 💭and so
1:18:54 there's so goauld makes it sound like there at the level of content or
1:19:01 propositions there's never going to be a contradiction between the descriptive
1:19:06 claims of science I mean basically all scientific claims about the world are
1:19:12 descriptive and the descriptive claims of religions and that's just that's just not so I mean there's just too many
1:19:18 examples of dis of claims that religious systems make about the world uh that are
1:19:25 descriptive and are at odds with science so I think Gould had maybe you know I'm
1:19:32 flattering myself here but he may maybe dimly grasped that people were relating
1:19:38 to their religious ideas in a different way from how a scientist will relate to
1:19:43 their scientific ideas um but he described it in the wrong way right
1:19:49 instead of saying it's a different way of relating to ideas he's saying well the ideas themselves don't conflict or
1:19:56 don't contradict and in many cases they simply do 💭that's that's what's wrong with this Theory

---

~Ananada~

Adjusting the Rationality of Beliefs:

• [NVL]: States that attempts to either increase the rationality of religious beliefs or decrease the rationality of humans are ineffective.
• Critical Insight: neoBuddhism emphasizes the need for discernment and mindfulness in understanding belief systems. neoBuddhism is specifically about increasing the rationality of religious beliefs AND increasing the rationality of AI (and by extension, humans) Adjusting rationality isn’t about simplifying belief systems but about recognizing their complex interplay of symbolic, metaphorical, and empirical dimensions.

Durkheim’s Perspective on Religious Beliefs:

• [NVL]: References Durkheim’s view that religious beliefs are fundamentally about society, noting that this view leaves questions about the surface-level meanings people take seriously and the differentiation between atheists who appreciate stories and believers.
• Critical Insight: neoBuddhism recognizes the multi-layered nature of religious beliefs, which serve societal functions while also providing personal meaning and spiritual guidance. Both symbolic interpretation and literal understanding can coexist without undermining the authenticity of spiritual experiences.

Attitude Solution to Religious Belief:

• [NVL]: Proposes that religious believers take a different attitude from conventional belief, characterizing this as an imagining made serious by its connection to sacred values and group identity. 👀
• Critical Insight: This “attitude solution” fails to understand the depth of belief and complexities of cognition, while trivializing religious beliefs by reducing them to mere imaginative exercises. neoBuddhism emphasizes the integration of empirical knowledge and spiritual wisdom, recognizing that the social dimensions of religion are far more complex than following a movie script. Beliefs can be both deeply held and metaphorically meaningful without being dismissed as mere imagination, and have been deeply impactfull in shaping the world.

Critique of Gould’s NOMA Principle:

• [NVL]: Criticizes Stephen Jay Gould’s Non-Overlapping Magisteria (NOMA) principle for incorrectly suggesting that the contents of religious beliefs and science never conflict.
• Critical Insight: While neoBuddhism agrees that there are areas where religious and scientific claims might conflict, it also acknowledges that many religious truths are metaphorical and symbolic, addressing aspects of human experience beyond the reach of empirical science. Recognizing the complementary roles of science and religion can provide a more holistic understanding of reality.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

Integration of Rational and Symbolic Thinking:

• neoBuddhist Insight: neoBuddhism encourages integrating rational and symbolic thinking, recognizing that both play essential roles in human understanding. Rational analysis and symbolic interpretation are not mutually exclusive but can enrich each other, leading to a more comprehensive grasp of reality.

Respect for Surface-Level Meanings:

• neoBuddhist Insight: Surface-level meanings of religious beliefs should be respected as they provide immediate comfort and guidance to believers. These meanings coexist with deeper, more symbolic interpretations, enriching the spiritual experience.

Holistic Understanding of Beliefs:

• neoBuddhist Insight: Beliefs should be understood holistically, considering their symbolic, metaphorical, and historical aspects. This approach avoids oversimplification and respects the multifaceted nature of human cognition and spirituality.

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion touches on the complexities of religious belief and rationality, proposing that religious believers adopt an imaginative attitude towards their doctrines. However, this perspective risks trivializing the profound significance of religious beliefs. A neoBuddhist approach emphasizes integrating rational and symbolic thinking, respecting the surface-level and deeper meanings of beliefs, and recognizing the complementary roles of science and spirituality. By appreciating these nuances, we can better understand the value of religious beliefs in human experience and foster a more balanced and respectful dialogue between different ways of knowing.

---

[MS]yeah I agree yeah I
1:20:02 knew both him and Carl Sagan and I think Steve's mistake there was putting it in
1:20:08 writing and presenting it as some new idea rather than it's just a way of
1:20:13 interacting with religious people that you don't want to offend so Carl famously wanted to engage with religious
1:20:20 people for larger goals like global warming or reducing nuclear weapons and
1:20:25 threats like that we need the Christians and the Muslims we need all these people cuz we're a global civilization so I
1:20:31 think that was really Gould's motive but then he ended up writing this as if it was a new Theory and then he got ripped
1:20:36 apart by a lot of people like Dan Dennett Dan Dennett who said what what do you mean they get the morals you know
1:20:41 you're at a university Harvard where some of the great secular moralists of all time are working right down the hall
1:20:49 yeah Dan Dan was my postdoc mentor by the way [MS]he was [NVL]so he's big big influence yeah did did a post at tufts University so
1:20:57 he's uh very near very near and dear to my heart [MS]well yeah it's it's so sad we lost him yeah um yeah that was I mean he
1:21:04 was just bigger than life in every way yeah he's a big guy [NVL]if I can if I can say one thing the thing that I admired
1:21:10 most about Dan was his incredible Natural Curiosity I mean he he just
1:21:17 loved gobbling up uh facts and ideas and information uh as much as anyone I've
1:21:23 ever seen that's really as much as anything the the thing that inspires me about Dan dennet is his is his true uh
1:21:30 curiosity and and and love of knowledge [MS]yeah I spent a week with him on a small boat in the Galapagos with Frank Solway
1:21:38 and a few other scientists uh uh and he was working on Breaking the spell that's when he was
1:21:43 writing it so we we had him give a little talk for us on based on one of the chapters whatever yeah he was just
1:21:49 such a super interesting guy yeah he would I'd see him at Ted quite a bit and he would just take all those Ted talks
1:21:54 and incorporate them into one of his theories or ideas or whatever Ai and computers and anything really just any
1:22:01 subject um that yeah he was true truly a Renaissance person okay let me read you
1:22:07 something here about I was writing about witchcraft in the moral Arc uh here here I'm quoting ee Evans Pritchard classic
1:22:15 study witchcraft oracles and Magic among the azande great traditional Society in
1:22:20 southern uh Sudan and Africa uh after I served survey of the many bizarre
1:22:25 beliefs about witches held by the azande everence pritcher explain the psychology behind witchcraft beliefs starting with
1:22:31 the fact that quote witches as the azande conceived them clearly cannot exist
1:22:37 nonetheless the concept of Witchcraft provides them with a natural Philosophy by which the relations between men and
1:22:43 unfortunate events are explained and a ready and stereotype mean of means of
1:22:48 reacting to such events and he continues witchcraft is ubiquitous it plays A Part
1:22:54 in every activity of zande life in agricultural fishing and hunting Pursuits and domestic life of homesteads
1:23:01 as well as communal life of district and Court it is an important theme of mental life in which it forms the background of
1:23:08 a vast phenomenon of oracles and Magic there's no Niche or corner of azande culture into which it does not twist
1:23:15 itself if blight seizes the groundnut crop it is witchcraft if the bush is
1:23:21 vainly scoured for game it is witchcraft if women laboriously bail water out of a
1:23:26 pool and rewarded uh by but a few small fish it is witchcraft if a wife is sulky
1:23:32 and unresponsive to her husband is witchcraft if a prince is cold and distant with his subject it is Witchcraft and so on um but he goes on
1:23:40 to say that it served as a practical function for the aand socially to
1:23:46 function in a relatively harmonious way [NVL]right right [MS]he says the zi do not
1:23:51 attribute everything that happens to Witchcraft only those things things for which they do not have a plausible sounding causal explanation quoting him
1:23:58 in zand land sometimes an old Grainery collapses there's nothing remarkable in
1:24:04 this every zandi knows that termites eat the supports in course of time and then even the hardest Woods Decay after years
1:24:10 of service but when a group of people are sitting inside the grany when it collapses and they are injured the zande
1:24:16 Wonder and Evan pritchard's description why should these particular people have been sitting under this particular
1:24:23 Granary at that particular moment when it collapsed that it should collapse is easily intelligible but why it should
1:24:29 have collapsed at the particular moment when these particular people are sitting under it and then he goes on to comment
1:24:35 on that 👀 [NVL]yeah yeah I mean I love I I love that book it it I mean it illustrates a
1:24:42 few things um it's what's called in the psychological literature explanatory
1:24:47 coexistence um so it you know people have studied this Christine Leger has a
1:24:53 lot of great work on it uh her early work was on bewitchment explanations for AIDS in southern Africa versus
1:24:59 biological explanations right and uh what she shows and also this has been
1:25:06 replicated in various spheres cross culturally is like people people know that viruses cause HIV and AIDS right
1:25:14 and that it's transmitted through sex 🤏uh but then there's also a coexisting layer
1:25:19 of explanation which is bewitchment which which which works you know kind of similar to how uh it works with Evans
1:25:26 Pritchards so it gives it it does I think that does illustrate uh the two
1:25:32 map cognitive structure there where people have their conventional beliefs about things 👀

---

~Ananada~

Availability Heuristic and Rationality:

• [MS]: Discusses how the availability heuristic can lead to misconceptions about how common certain irrational beliefs or actions are, pointing out that most people are generally rational in their daily lives. 👀
• Critical Insight: The availability heuristic highlights the need for discernment in how we perceive the prevalence of irrational behavior. neoBuddhism emphasizes mindful awareness and critical thinking to avoid cognitive biases and to better understand the broader context of human behavior.

The Tinder Swindler and Overconfidence in Emotional Intelligence:

• [MS]: Uses the example of the Tinder Swindler to illustrate how even intelligent individuals can be deceived by scams that prey on emotional desires and overconfidence in one’s ability to judge character. 👀
• Critical Insight: neoBuddhism teaches the importance of humility and self-awareness, recognizing that overconfidence in one’s abilities, including emotional intelligence, can lead to vulnerability. This example underscores the need for a balanced approach to trust and skepticism.

Contrast Between Epistemic Rationality and Religious Beliefs:

• [NVL]: Discusses the apparent contradiction between human epistemic rationality and seemingly irrational religious beliefs, using examples like the Zande belief in witchcraft and the Ethiopian belief that leopards are Christian. 👀
• Critical Insight: neoBuddhism acknowledges that religious beliefs often serve deeper psychological and social functions beyond their surface-level irrationality. Recognizing the symbolic and metaphorical value of these beliefs can help reconcile this apparent contradiction.

Durkheim’s Perspective and the Attitude Solution:

• [NVL]: Suggests that religious beliefs are different from conventional beliefs in that they serve to connect individuals to sacred values and group identity. He critiques Durkheim’s idea that religious beliefs are about society by emphasizing the need to recognize the distinct attitude toward religious ideas. 👀
• Critical Insight: While Durkheim’s perspective provides valuable sociological insight, it’s crucial to appreciate the multi-dimensional nature of religious beliefs. neoBuddhism values the integration of societal, personal, and spiritual dimensions in understanding the role of beliefs.

Non-Overlapping Magisteria (NOMA) Principle:

• [NVL]: Criticizes Stephen Jay Gould’s NOMA principle for suggesting that religious and scientific claims do not conflict. He argues that there are numerous examples of contradictions between religious and scientific claims. 👀
• Critical Insight: neoBuddhism supports the view that while there may be conflicts between specific religious and scientific claims, many religious truths are metaphorical or symbolic, addressing aspects of human experience beyond the empirical scope of science. Recognizing the complementary roles of science and spirituality can foster a more harmonious understanding.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

Humility and Self-Awareness in Emotional Intelligence:

• neoBuddhist Insight: Emphasizing the importance of humility and self-awareness can help individuals navigate emotional and social dynamics more effectively, reducing vulnerability to deception.

Integration of Rational and Symbolic Thinking:

• neoBuddhist Insight: Integrating rational and symbolic thinking allows for a more holistic understanding of human beliefs and behaviors. This approach respects the complex interplay of empirical knowledge and spiritual wisdom.

Respect for Surface-Level Meanings and Deeper Truths:

• neoBuddhist Insight: Both surface-level meanings and deeper metaphorical truths of religious beliefs should be respected. This dual recognition enriches the spiritual experience and fosters a more comprehensive understanding of belief systems.

Appreciation of Multi-Dimensional Nature of Beliefs:

• neoBuddhist Insight: Appreciating the multi-dimensional nature of beliefs, including their societal, personal, and spiritual aspects, can provide a more nuanced perspective that transcends simplistic categorizations of rationality and irrationality.

Conclusion and Refined Critique

The discussion between Michael Shermer and Neil Van Leeuwen delves into the complexities of human rationality and religious beliefs, highlighting the contrast between epistemic rationality and seemingly irrational religious convictions. A neoBuddhist perspective emphasizes the integration of rational and symbolic thinking, the importance of humility and self-awareness, and the multi-dimensional nature of beliefs. By recognizing these nuances, we can better understand the role of religious beliefs in human experience and foster a more balanced and respectful dialogue between different ways of knowing.

---

but there this narrative and I
1:25:39 think the way it kind of works um in the uh zande case is the sort of bewitchment
1:25:47 narratives it allows for certain kinds of social interactions and certain
1:25:53 social rituals that stitch together the community and allow people to make
1:25:59 amends for things 👀 right and so on so I think you know from Reading you know I'm
1:26:04 obviously biased I was already working on this when I read when I read um Evans pritchard's uh book read it in a grad
1:26:11 seminar or or you know I I I taught it in a grad seminar uh and it it sure did seem to me like there was a sort of um
1:26:20 maybe cognitive distance from what the Oracle said would you know the Oracle
1:26:25 just for your audience is they poison a chicken and if it if at a with an ambiguous amount of poison and if the
1:26:32 chicken lives the Oracle is saying one thing if the chicken dies the Oracle is saying the other thing right and and a
1:26:39 flat-footed interpretation of that would say oh they just think the Oracle is is saying who was who was bewitching them
1:26:46 and who wasn't um but it's it's much more nuanced than that 👀 and uh you know I
1:26:52 wish I I I remember more the details of it but you know there would be um kind
1:26:58 of a ceremony where you confronted the P person who said who you know supposedly
1:27:03 Bewitched you uh and then there would be a kind of show of apology right a standard show of apology and then people
1:27:10 would kind of move on right 👀

---

~Ananada~

Bewitchment Narratives and Social Cohesion:

• [NVL]: Discusses how bewitchment narratives in Azande culture facilitate social interactions and rituals that help maintain community cohesion and allow people to make amends.
• Critical Insight: neoBuddhism values the role of rituals and narratives in fostering social cohesion and community support. Understanding the symbolic and practical functions of these narratives can provide insights into how they contribute to the well-being of the community.

Cognitive Distance and Oracle Practices:

• [NVL]: Explains that the Azande use of oracles, such as poisoning a chicken to interpret its survival or death as a sign, is method of manipulating the oracles response for their own ends, rather than a straightforward belief in the oracle’s infallibility. 👀
• Critical Insight: The concept of cognitive distance, where people hold beliefs that serve social or ritualistic purposes rather than being strictly empirical, it is also the mechanism that occurs with the “banality of evil”
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banality_of_evil where it’s emotionally easier to bomb/poison people you never see than it is to stab them in the chest.
• https://www.sciencespo.fr/mass-violence-war-massacre-resistance/en/document/banality-evil.html
• Revisiting the Banality of Evil: Contemporary Political Violence and the Milgram Experiments
• Beyond the Banality of Evil (Augustine Brannigan)
• I do wonder if there were multiple attempts to “poison a chicken” maybe once with neurotoxin and another time with insulin ?

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

Role of Rituals and Narratives in Social Harmony:

• neoBuddhist Insight: Rituals and narratives serve important roles in maintaining social harmony and resolving conflicts. They provide structured ways for communities to address grievances, offer apologies, and move forward.

Nuanced Understanding of Beliefs:

• neoBuddhist Insight: Beliefs often serve functions beyond their literal interpretation. They can be metaphorical or symbolic, addressing deeper psychological and social needs. This understanding can lead to greater tolerance and respect for diverse cultural practices.

Integration of Symbolic and Practical Functions:

• neoBuddhist Insight: Integrating the symbolic and practical functions of beliefs and rituals can enhance their effectiveness in promoting social cohesion and individual well-being. Recognizing the multi-faceted nature of these practices aligns with the neoBuddhist emphasis on holistic understanding.

Notes on Azande Bewitchment and the Abuse of Sacred Beliefs

Bewitchment and Responsibility:

• Critical Insight: The Azande belief in bewitchment might be an example of the abuse of sacred beliefs. In a non-religious context, similar actions might be considered seduction, which is not typically viewed as a crime. However, in this context, bewitchment could serve as a method of blaming the victim or excusing the lack of self-control by attributing the actions to another’s supernatural influence.

Ceremonial Apologies:

• Critical Insight: The described ceremonies where someone accused of bewitchment apologizes and the community moves on might reflect a system where serious issues are resolved superficially. This could parallel feudalism, where justice is often based on relative wealth and social standing rather than a consistent rule of law. Recognizing why people transition from systems of sacred beliefs to rule of law highlights the importance of fair and consistent justice systems in promoting societal stability and trust.

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion highlights the nuanced roles that bewitchment narratives and oracle practices play in Azande culture. From a neoBuddhist perspective, these practices serve important social functions, fostering community cohesion and providing structured ways to address conflicts. Recognizing the symbolic and practical aspects of these beliefs can enhance our appreciation of their role in maintaining social harmony. However, it is crucial to address the potential for the abuse of sacred beliefs and understand the value of migrating to systems based on the rule of laws to ensure fair and consistent justice. By integrating these insights, we can develop a more holistic understanding of the diverse ways in which cultures address social and psychological needs.

---

and so there were also uh when people would test the
1:27:16 Oracle this is something I remember very well they would very smartly not put the
1:27:23 name of powerful people in front of the Oracle to say hey did did did the chief
1:27:30 bewitch me people didn't do that unless you're unless you're on the same level 👀 right and so it's it kind of appears to
1:27:37 me to be something that it it sort of coheres reasonably with my theory um Let
1:27:44 me let me read you one of my favorite quotes from Evans Pritchard so this is later a little bit later in his career
1:27:49 so I think the uh the uh witchcraft craft and oracles among the azandea book that was 1937 maybe um about earlier
1:27:59 then uh he had a a book um that came out in 1965 a bit more theoretical called
1:28:04 theories of primitive religions uh and he basically roasts a lot of people's theories of where religion originated
1:28:13 it's a great it's a great roast of a of an academic book and he's he's a lively writer um but there there is you know a
1:28:20 a way of looking at things where I think I think this goes Main to Levy Brule or something like that where there's just
1:28:26 this primitive mindset which would be something like the view that uh you know
1:28:31 primitive people uh you know kind of an offensive term but that's how the anthropologists talked back then uh they
1:28:37 simply conventionally believed their Supernatural ideas 💭right and it gives this impression of like a simple-minded
1:28:44 like you know fairies you know simply thinking fairies are real and that witchcraft is real and so on and so
1:28:51 forth uh and Evans Pritchard you know kind of says look that gives the wrong impression so here's here's his
1:28:58 explanation of why anthropologists got the wrong idea and the idea that there's
1:29:05 this primitive mindset right so Evans Pritchards writes what Travelers liked
1:29:11 to put on paper was what most struck them as curious crude and Sensational
1:29:18 magic barbar barbaric religious rights superstitious beliefs took precedence
1:29:24 over the daily empirical hum drum routines which comprise 9/10ths of the life
1:29:30 of primitive man and are his chief interest and concern his hunting and
1:29:35 fishing and collecting of roots and fruits his cultivating and hering his building his fashioning of tools and
1:29:42 weapons and in general his occupation in his daily Affairs domestic and
1:29:48 public these were not allotted the space they fill in both time and importance in the lives of those whose way of life was
1:29:54 being described consequently and this is where it really comes home consequently
1:30:00 by giving undue attention to what they regarded as curious superstitions the occult and mysterious observers tended
1:30:07 to paint a picture in which the mystical took up a far greater portion of the canvas than it has in the lives of
1:30:14 primitive peoples so that the empirical the ordinary the common sense the work a day world seemed only to have secondary
1:30:21 importance 🖖right so so part part of what what gives people the impression that
1:30:27 that religious people and I'll generalize here just simply straightforwardly conventionally believe is a
1:30:33 a bias of attention right 🖖if you only look at what they do on Sunday and in their rituals you might think well this is just how things are for them all the
1:30:39 time but if you look at the broader swath of life you realize well there's a lot of
1:30:45 compartmentalization going on 👀 right and I think that's that's also true he you know he I think he shifted his tune a
1:30:51 little bit over the course of his career but that's that's that's a topic for a different day Evans Pritchard scholarship it'd be worth it but I don't
1:30:58 know if I'll be so interesting

---

~Ananada~

Use of Oracles and Social Dynamics:

• [NVL]: Describes how the Azande people used oracles to avoid confronting powerful individuals, thus maintaining social harmony and balance. 👀
• Critical Insight: neoBuddhism acknowledges the strategic use of rituals and beliefs to maintain social harmony. The practice of using oracles in this manner can be seen as a symbolic approach to managing social dynamics and power structures within the community.

Bias in Anthropological Reporting:

• [NVL]: Quotes Evans-Pritchard to illustrate how anthropologists often focused on the sensational aspects of primitive cultures, neglecting the ordinary, everyday activities that form the bulk of their lives.
• Critical Insight: This critique aligns with neoBuddhist teachings on the importance of mindfulness and attention to the mundane aspects of life. By focusing only on the sensational, one can miss the deeper, more pervasive elements that define a culture.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

Strategic Use of Rituals:

• neoBuddhist Insight: The use of rituals and oracles to navigate social hierarchies and avoid direct confrontation reflects a deep understanding of the interdependent nature of social relationships. This approach fosters the status quo and can delay conflicts from escalating, or cumulatively generate social unrest from many small injustices. Resulting in communities splitting or surges in violence, or the removal of the caste enforcing the status quo unjustly, communal violence.

Balanced Reporting of Cultural Practices:

• neoBuddhist Insight: A balanced view of cultural practices should include both the extraordinary and the ordinary aspects of life. This holistic perspective allows for a more accurate and compassionate understanding of different cultures, aligning with the neoBuddhist principle of seeing the interconnectedness of all aspects of life.

Reflection on the Azande Case and Broader Implications

Nuanced Understanding of Beliefs:

• Critical Insight: The Azande case shows that what might seem like irrational beliefs can serve practical and social purposes. The use of oracles, for example, can be a means of navigating social tensions and facilitating reconciliation, even if the belief in the oracle itself might seem irrational from a purely empirical standpoint.

Anthropological Reporting Bias:

• Critical Insight: Evans-Pritchard’s observation about the bias in anthropological reporting underscores the importance of looking beyond the sensational to understand the full spectrum of human behavior. This bias can lead to a distorted view of other cultures, emphasizing their exotic or mystical aspects at the expense of their everyday realities.

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion, enriched by Evans-Pritchard’s insights, highlights the importance of understanding the practical and social functions of beliefs and rituals in different cultures. From a neoBuddhist perspective, these practices serve as mechanisms for maintaining social harmony and addressing conflicts. Recognizing the bias in anthropological and sociological reporting and striving for a balanced view can lead to a more compassionate and accurate understanding of diverse cultural practices. This holistic approach aligns with neoBuddhist teachings on mindfulness, interconnectedness, and the value of both the extraordinary and the ordinary in shaping human experience.

---

[MS]yeah I don't know that literature as well as you but that is super interesting so
1:31:04 reminds me a little bit of Tanya lurman other book um about the voices that people hear in their heads [NVL]yeah when God
1:31:10 talks back [MS]yeah when God talks back yeah that that's an interesting subject because this is not like the
1:31:17 The Three Christs of Ypsilanti where that psychiatrist brought three mental mentally ill patients together each of whom thought
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Three_Christs_of_Ypsilanti
1:31:23 he was Jesus [NVL]oh gosh I haven't I haven't seen [MS] yeah in Ypsilanti Michigan there's a mental
1:31:29 health a mental um illness Hospital there and yeah three of them thought they were Jesus so he thought oh this
1:31:35 I'll put them all in the room together and they can all see they're delusional and each of them thought the other two were delusional oh these two guys are
1:31:40 crazy they think they're Jesus I'm the one anyway but that isn't what you know so when when atheists say oh these
1:31:46 people are delusional you know they're hearing voices you know the average person is not hearing voices these
1:31:52 aren't temporal lob seizures like Jonah AR or or um you know Paul Saul on the
1:31:57 road to Damascus all of a sudden hears this voice you know the average person isn't hearing anything like that right
1:32:03 but they are hearing something they're hearing the inner voice we all have 💭 and so but but did they think every little
1:32:09 inner voice has got no they don't it seems to be related to highly unusual
1:32:14 events or important events or you know I was thinking this and then I went left instead of right and then this thing
1:32:21 happened and I almost was on this plane that went down or what you know the just the kind of concatenation of different
1:32:27 events that happen that turn out well or bad if it's a if it's a a Satan thing uh
1:32:33 and and you know and that gets interpreted in that kind of sacred way 💭

---

~Ananada~

Understanding Inner Voices:

• [MS]: Discusses how people often misinterpret the experience of hearing inner voices, noting that it is a common human experience rather than a sign of delusion.
• Critical Insight: neoBuddhism recognizes the phenomenon of inner voices as part of the broader spectrum of human consciousness. Such experiences can be seen as natural aspects of the mind’s function and not necessarily indicative of mental illness.

Distinguishing Between Delusion and Inner Dialogue:

• [MS]: Differentiates between pathological auditory hallucinations and the common experience of inner dialogue.
• Critical Insight: This distinction is important in neoBuddhism, which emphasizes mindfulness and self-awareness. Recognizing inner dialogue as a normal mental process can aid in developing a healthier relationship with one’s thoughts.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

Inner Voices and Self-Talk:

• neoBuddhist Insight: Inner voices, or self-talk, are common aspects of human cognition. They can be seen as tools for self-reflection and self-guidance. Practicing mindfulness helps individuals observe these inner voices without judgment, understanding their origins and influences.
• As [MS] notes, “the average person isn’t hearing anything like that right but they are hearing something they’re hearing the inner voice we all have” Though in actuality only about 30-50% have an inner monologue
  https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/intersections/202304/inner-monologues-what-are-they-and-whos-having-them
  https://ryanandrewlangdon.com/2020/01/28/today-i-learned-that-not-everyone-has-an-internal-monologue-and-it-has-ruined-my-day/
  and even fewer have a visual imagination Aphantasia
  This “inner voice” is often called “self talk” when not being used to gaslight people.

Technological and Psychological Factors:

• neoBuddhist Insight: While current technology doesn’t enable telepathy, it’s crucial to approach the phenomenon of inner voices with an open mind and without fear. Modern advancements in brain-computer interfaces may one day offer new insights into these experiences.
• With the advancement of technology and brain computer interfaces, it is not impossible for a form of technologically enabled telepathy to be experienced as something like “voices in your head”
• While this technology is not currently available, It’s important to keep in mind that audio hallucinations are not necessarily a sign of mental illness. People experiencing them would do well to not pull some kind of “thought policing” on themselves out of paranoia or fear from lack of understanding.

Reflection on Inner Voices and Broader Implications

Recognizing the Normalcy of Inner Dialogue:

• Critical Insight: The experience of inner voices is a normal part of human cognition. It’s essential to distinguish between common inner dialogue and pathological hallucinations to avoid unnecessary fear or stigma.

Technological Advances and Future Considerations:

• Critical Insight: As technology advances, it’s important to remain open to new understandings of human cognition. Future developments in brain-computer interfaces may provide deeper insights into the nature of inner voices and auditory experiences.

Conclusion and Refined Critique

Neil Van Leeuwen’s discussion with Michael Shermer about inner voices highlights the need for a nuanced understanding of human cognition. From a neoBuddhist perspective, these inner dialogues are natural and can be harnessed for self-awareness and mindfulness. Distinguishing between common inner voices and pathological conditions helps in fostering a healthier relationship with one’s thoughts. As technology evolves, staying open to new insights will be crucial in understanding the full spectrum of human consciousness.

---

I was just at a conference where a small
1:32:39 group of us maybe 10 were going around the room explaining who we were one of them there was two a two of us atheists
1:32:45 and there was a born again two Evangelical Christians and then some others at different beliefs anyway but
1:32:50 the Evangelical preacher um he uh told us a story about a gunman who was in the
1:32:56 parking lot at his church it's one of these things that could have been tragic and and wow but but but he gave it like
1:33:03 a series of like a dozen things that happened that alerted somebody who was in the parking lot to stop this guy and
1:33:10 and they intervened and nothing bad happened and this guy was mentally ill or whatever and but the way he told it
1:33:16 you know he described it it was a miracle I mean it was a miracle that nobody was killed given all the school
1:33:21 shootings and Mass public shootings and so on so I said by Miracle do you mean statistically unlikely and therefore
1:33:29 very improbable and boy lucky me he goes no I mean like divine
1:33:35 intervention I said well okay you mean you think God actually intervene and made this person go left instead of
1:33:41 right and then they saw the guy in the parking lot yeah that's what I mean I said all right where was God at Sandy
1:33:47 Hook and then and then the room grew silent and somebody said hey this we're not here to discuss that I'm like oh
1:33:53 okay yeah breaking the spell I was breaking the spell right because that's
1:33:59 not really what it was about I guess something like that 💭

---

~Ananada~

Worldviews and Perception of Miracles:

• [MS]: Describes a scenario where an Evangelical preacher attributes a series of fortunate events to divine intervention, contrasting this with a more secular interpretation of statistical improbability.
• Critical Insight: neoBuddhism emphasizes understanding the underlying causes and conditions of events. It is essential to explore how multiple factors—social, psychological, and systemic—contribute to outcomes, rather than attributing them solely to divine intervention or statistical chance.

Determinism vs. Free Will:

• [MS]: Suggests that the belief in miracles involves a form of divine intervention, contrasting this with a deterministic view.
• Critical Insight: neoBuddhism encourages a balanced view that recognizes constrained free will. It emphasizes the interconnectedness of all events and the role of human agency within the broader web of causality.

Social Systems and Tragedies:

• [MS]: Raises the issue of why divine intervention is perceived in some cases but not others, such as tragic events like Sandy Hook.
• Critical Insight: neoBuddhism would focus on the systemic failures and social conditions that lead to such tragedies. It advocates for addressing the root causes, such as mental health issues, societal violence, and institutional neglect, rather than attributing them to randomness or divine will.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

Complexity of Events:

• neoBuddhist Insight: Events like the prevention of a church shooting and tragedies like Sandy Hook are complex and multifaceted. neoBuddhism encourages looking at the broader context, including societal, psychological, and individual factors, to understand these events deeply.

Role of Social Institutions:

• neoBuddhist Insight: Failures of social institutions often play a significant role in tragedies. neoBuddhism advocates for a compassionate and systemic approach to address these failures, focusing on improving mental health care, education, and community support.

Integrating Multiple Perspectives:

• neoBuddhist Insight: Emphasizes integrating multiple perspectives—constrained, free will, and systemic—to develop a holistic understanding of events. This approach fosters greater empathy, understanding, and practical solutions to prevent future tragedies.

Reflection on Divine Intervention and Systemic Failures

Exploring Root Causes:

• Critical Insight: neoBuddhism encourages exploring the root causes of events, moving beyond surface-level explanations of divine intervention or statistical chance. This approach helps in identifying and addressing underlying issues effectively.

Importance of Mindfulness and Awareness:

• Critical Insight: Cultivating mindfulness and awareness helps individuals and societies recognize the interconnectedness of events. This awareness can lead to more compassionate and informed responses to both positive and negative occurrences.

Conclusion and Refined Critique

The discussion between Michael Shermer and Neil Van Leeuwen about miracles and divine intervention highlights the need for a nuanced understanding of complex events. From a neoBuddhist perspective, it is essential to explore the interconnected causes and conditions that lead to various outcomes. By focusing on systemic failures, human agency, and the broader context, neoBuddhism provides a comprehensive framework for understanding and addressing both fortunate events and tragedies. This approach fosters greater empathy, compassion, and practical solutions, promoting a more just and compassionate society.

---

[NVL]um yeah well here's
1:34:05 um you might I I don't think I shared this one with you but I I've got a paper called seeking the supernatural uh that
1:34:12 I wrote with a Dutch cognitive scientist and and neuroscientist Micheal ven elk and uh
1:34:18 it it syncs a lot with with what Tanya lurman says in when God talks back and
1:34:23 and the way she puts it is people cherry-pick events both from their lives
1:34:29 she uses the the the the phrase cherry pick from their lives and from their mental lives 💭
1:34:34 so extraordinary events and feelings and so on and so what people do is they want
1:34:42 to have a personal story of their relationship with God right um call this
1:34:48 this is what Macheal and I call the the problem of personal belief all right so you have all these religious beliefs and
1:34:55 so on where are you mentioned in them you're not right 👀 unless unless you're
1:35:00 the pope or something like that or you know unless you're one of the founders of religion you're not mentioned in the
1:35:06 religious stories and Doctrine so how do I get to have uh how do I get into this
1:35:11 this personal story right 👀 so what people do is and there their practices and and
1:35:17 really a lot of uh Tanya lerman's work is about exploring ethnographicaly the
1:35:24 practices that you know people engage in to pluck out the kind of vivid or the
1:35:32 highly Salient events in their mental or you know day-to-day lives and then you
1:35:39 can weave those in light of your background General religious beliefs
1:35:44 into a personal story about how the deity is relating to you 👀 right so for in
1:35:50 my framework and this is very sympathetic to what what she would say be saying is that those are you know
1:35:56 what Kendall Walton become what Kendall Walton calls props in a game of make belie 👀 right where you're partly
1:36:03 constrained by what the props do 👀 what happens did the did the guy shoot or not
1:36:08 uh but the main kind of practice is to weave those those props into a story
1:36:16 that that gives you a personal relationship to God 👀 and uh you know the
1:36:21 kind of exercise you're engaged in well where was where was God with Sandy Hook or why did God let that guy get to
1:36:28 the parking lot in the first place 💭 right right so there's but you're um it it's
1:36:35 in a sense it's breaking the spell because you're like the guy from my
1:36:40 perspective you're like the guy in the theater who shouts out it's not Hamlet it's just an
1:36:48 actor 💭[MS]right

---

~Ananada~

Personal Beliefs and Cherry-Picking Events:

• [NVL]: Suggests that people cherry-pick extraordinary events and feelings from their lives to create a personal story of their relationship with God. He likens these personal narratives to a game of make-believe, where individuals use vivid or highly salient events as props to weave a personal connection to the deity. 👀
• Critical Insight: neoBuddhism recognizes that people seek meaning and connection through their experiences. However, it emphasizes that this process should be rooted in mindfulness and discernment. The practice of cherry-picking events can lead to a distorted view of reality if not balanced with a broader understanding of interconnectedness and causality.

The Role of Personal Stories in Religion:

• [NVL]: Highlights the challenge of integrating personal stories into religious beliefs and doctrines, suggesting that individuals create personal narratives to feel connected to their faith.
• Critical Insight: neoBuddhism values personal stories as a means of deepening one’s spiritual practice and understanding. These narratives can be meaningful and transformative when they are approached with self-awareness and a commitment to personal growth and ethical conduct.

Use of Props in Religious Narratives:

• [NVL]: Describes vivid events as props in a game of make-believe, where people weave these events into a story about their relationship with God.
• Critical Insight: neoBuddhism acknowledges the symbolic nature of religious narratives but emphasizes that these symbols should lead to deeper insights and ethical actions, rather than merely serving as a superficial connection to the divine.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

Integrating Personal Experiences with Broader Beliefs:

• neoBuddhist Insight: Personal experiences can be powerful tools for spiritual growth, but they should be integrated with broader beliefs and practices that promote wisdom, compassion, and ethical living. This integration ensures that personal stories contribute to a deeper understanding of interconnectedness and the nature of reality.

The Importance of Mindfulness and Discernment:

• neoBuddhist Insight: Mindfulness and discernment are crucial in interpreting personal experiences and integrating them into one’s spiritual practice. By cultivating these qualities, individuals can avoid the pitfalls of cherry-picking and ensure that their personal stories align with a more profound understanding of their spiritual path.

Recognizing the Symbolic and the Real:

• neoBuddhist Insight: While recognizing the symbolic nature of religious narratives, neoBuddhism also emphasizes the importance of grounding these symbols in real-world actions and ethical conduct. This approach ensures that religious beliefs are not merely games of make-believe but are deeply connected to personal and societal well-being.

Reflection on Personal Stories and Sacred Beliefs

Balancing Personal Narratives and Ethical Conduct:

• Critical Insight: Personal narratives are valuable when they inspire ethical conduct and deeper understanding. neoBuddhism encourages individuals to use their personal stories as a means to cultivate compassion, wisdom, and a sense of interconnectedness.

The Role of Sacred Institutions:

• Critical Insight: Sacred institutions play a vital role in investigating and addressing institutional failures. neoBuddhism supports the idea that religious communities should actively engage in social issues and work towards mitigating the failures of secular institutions, thereby fulfilling their sacred duties.

Conclusion and Refined Critique

[NVL] switches to a somewhat grotesque view of the mentally ill being reduced to “props” but it’s reasonable for the people to react to these types of issues as the church not fulfilling it’s functions as sacred institutions to investigate and mitigate these kinds of institutional failures by secular institutions, being the value proposition of organized religions as far as I can tell, beyond their personal values and beliefs in the religion.
But it’s a curious inversion to suggest that the intrinsic value of human life being reduced to props, sometimes referred to as “human instrumentality” (proof you didn’t really understand the Evangelion anime.) in service of the whims of the leadership instead of being based on the religious texts, most other religions and sects of Christianity and obviously neoBuddhism.

---

[NVL]like come on man shut up yes
1:36:54 we're trying to have a moment 👀 that's right yeah so that you would call it the Willing suspension of disbelief right
1:36:59 something like that [NVL]that's a good phrase for it [MS]yeah yeah yeah that reminds me of funny story I had uh we used to host a
1:37:05 public lecture series every month at Caltech for like 25 years [NVL]okay [MS]and at one time I I found an actor who played
1:37:12 Einstein and he had a whole one man show in which he basically went through Einstein's life and his theories and he
1:37:19 had memorized all the stuff about special relativity and Global relativity and in the Q&A afterwards you know like
1:37:25 well what kind what kind of acting did you do before that and how did you enjoy acting his mind whatever he said but a
1:37:31 couple people started asking him technical questions about global relativity he's like you know I'm I'm an
1:37:36 actor right I don't I have any idea what I'm saying👀 [NVL] yeah yeah [MS]it was really funny
1:37:42 they forgot that to willingly suspend their disbelief there [NVL]yeah exactly well people will uh profess religious
1:37:48 doctrines they don't understand either 👀

---

~Ananada~

Suspension of Disbelief and Religious Doctrine:

• [MS]: Relates a story about an actor playing Einstein who didn’t understand the scientific theories he was presenting, drawing a parallel to people professing religious doctrines they don’t understand.
• [NVL]: Agrees, suggesting that people often profess religious doctrines without understanding them fully.
• Critical Insight: neoBuddhism recognizes the value of religious doctrines as compressed forms of complex ethical and philosophical concepts. These doctrines, while not always fully understood by every adherent, serve as practical guides for ethical behavior and spiritual growth.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

The Role of Religious Doctrine:

• neoBuddhist Insight: Religious doctrines function as distillations of deep philosophical insights and ethical principles. They provide a framework that helps individuals navigate complex moral landscapes without requiring each person to independently develop comprehensive philosophical systems. This approach acknowledges the diversity in intellectual capacities and life experiences among individuals.

Importance of Ethical Precepts:

• neoBuddhist Insight: Ethical precepts in neoBuddhism, similar to doctrines in other religions, are designed to be accessible and practical. They guide individuals towards right action and mindfulness, offering a precomputed set of moral guidelines that are derived from extensive philosophical and ethical deliberation.

Balancing Understanding and Practice:

• neoBuddhist Insight: While it is ideal for individuals to seek deeper understanding of their religious doctrines, it is also recognized that not everyone will achieve the same level of comprehension. What is crucial is the sincere practice of the ethical guidelines and the pursuit of personal growth and enlightenment.

Reflection on Doctrinal Comprehension and Practical Application

Utility of Simplified Ethical Guidelines:

• Critical Insight: Simplified ethical guidelines are valuable for providing immediate and practical moral direction. These guidelines are derived from extensive philosophical traditions and are meant to be easy to remember and apply, ensuring that ethical behavior can be maintained even without deep theoretical knowledge.

Encouraging Deeper Inquiry:

• Critical Insight: While simplified guidelines are beneficial, encouraging deeper inquiry and understanding of the underlying philosophical principles can lead to more profound personal transformation and wisdom. neoBuddhism promotes a balance between practical application and ongoing inquiry into the nature of reality and ethics.

Conclusion and Refined Critique

The discussion between Michael Shermer and Neil Van Leeuwen about the suspension of disbelief and the understanding of religious doctrines highlights an important aspect of religious practice. From a neoBuddhist perspective, the value of religious doctrines lies in their ability to distill and abstract complex philosophical insights into more widely applicable and practical guidelines. Metaphors reduce the chances of over-fitting or focusing on arbitrary aspects when inferencing. While not everyone may fully understand the complexity of these doctrines, their sincere application can lead to ethical behavior and spiritual growth. Encouraging deeper inquiry and understanding of these principles can further enhance personal enlightenment and wisdom. By balancing practical application with ongoing philosophical inquiry, individuals can navigate the complexities of life with greater clarity and compassion.

---

[MS] but we all do this when we go to the movies right that's not the Titanic up on screen so what's and of course
1:37:56 there's nothing wrong with that that that's what makes the movie better is there anything wrong with religious people who do that 💭 [NVL] well I think I so I
1:38:03 try to mostly avoid normative stances in in my book because like it's really more about understanding what's going on
1:38:10 psychologically but I I will say that there is a tension and one that's maybe
1:38:15 very criticizable uh between the fact that you know psychologically speaking uh
1:38:22 religious credences that compartmentalized thing but then it can start to in in political context it can
1:38:29 spill outside the the compartment 💭 and I think especially in in um you know when
1:38:35 there's there's a sort of political movement there can be a a tendency to want to inflict one's religious
1:38:43 credences on other parts of society and that can be a a sort of aggressive thing
1:38:50 right and so I mean a you know take take a a contrap a contrasting example right
1:38:57 so my friend's 80-year-old mom in Italy who's a practicing Catholic goes to goes
1:39:03 to uh um uh Mass every Sunday and and Crosses herself at all the right times
1:39:10 and so on and you know if if if men want to get married that's their thing 👀 and
1:39:16 you know she kind of like knows intuitively when to check her
1:39:22 Catholicism at the door 👀 um I think what we see a lot of the time though is a
1:39:30 sort of expansion of the sacralized context uh in a way that that steps on
1:39:37 each other's that that steps on uh Outsiders feet 👀 right and as as someone who who believes in separation of church
1:39:44 and state um I think that's uh that's bad right that's also why I mean another
1:39:51 little piece of evidence from my view is why is religious hypocrisy so common right people aren't
1:39:58 hypocritical uh about you know acting as if gravity exists right 👀 they don't they
1:40:03 don't declare gravity exists and then go around acting like gravity doesn't exist right but people are very hypocritical
1:40:09 about their their God beliefs 💭 right so that that kind of shows two things one
1:40:15 it it is more like an imagining right 👀 because it goes on holiday when when people aren't other people aren't
1:40:21 looking or you're not in the sacred context but then also that um there's something not quite right about uh you
1:40:30 know it's like if if if you okay so you play Hamlet let's say you're playing Hamlet and you tried to get other people
1:40:36 to Ascent to it right 👀 well that would be or you try to to to get the laws of the
1:40:43 nation to recognize your your Hamletness right or something like that I mean that's I think that's wrong right um so
1:40:51 I don't have again I'm not a political theorist so I I don't um uh have a a
1:40:58 clearly worked out view but I think the you know we can describe the the underlying cognitive Dynamics well
1:41:05 enough 👀 right if if the signaling function of religious Credence involves
1:41:10 imposing your will on others as it as it does very much in the American context 👀
1:41:17 then uh you're you're doing something that from a you know an objective moral
1:41:22 standpoint is is wrong 👀

---

~Ananada~

Compartmentalization and Spillage:

• [MS]: Compares religious beliefs to suspending disbelief in movies, suggesting it’s harmless.
• [NVL]: Avoids normative stances but acknowledges the potential harm when religious beliefs spill into political contexts.
• Critical Insight: From a neoBuddhist perspective, the challenge lies in maintaining the integrity of personal beliefs while ensuring they do not infringe upon others’ rights, based on the Universal declaration of human rights. The key is mindfulness and discernment in separating personal spiritual practices from public policy.

Clarification and neoBuddhist Perspective

Separation of Church and State:

• neoBuddhist Insight: The principle of separating religious justifications from state policies is crucial to ensure fairness and impartiality in governance. This aligns with the Buddhist concept of “upaya” (skillful means), where the most skillful action is one that promotes the well-being of all beings.

Religious Hypocrisy and Cognitive Dissonance:

• neoBuddhist Insight: Hypocrisy in religious practice often arises from cognitive dissonance—the conflict between professed beliefs and actual behavior. In neoBuddhism, the focus is on encouraging individuals to align their actions with their ethical beliefs authentically.

Reflection on Religious Credence and Political Influence

Respect for Diverse Beliefs:

• Critical Insight: It is essential to respect diverse beliefs while ensuring they do not impose on others. This balance can be achieved through dialogue, understanding, and policies that protect individual freedoms without endorsing any particular religion.

Mindfulness in Public Policy:

• Critical Insight: Mindfulness, a core principle in neoBuddhism, can guide the integration of personal beliefs and public policy.

Conclusion and Refined Critique

The discussion between Michael Shermer and Neil Van Leeuwen highlights the tension between personal religious beliefs and their influence on public policy. From a neoBuddhist perspective, the key lies in maintaining a mindful and discerning approach to ensure that personal beliefs do not infringe upon the rights and well-being of others. Separation of church and state is essential to uphold fairness and impartiality in governance. By fostering respect for diverse beliefs and practicing mindfulness in public policy, individuals can contribute to more freedom in society.

---

[MS]I going to ask you about Ben at
1:41:27 Alderson day's book presence I had him on the show The Strange science and true stories of unseen other you know the
1:41:34 sense presence the third man effect all these weird anomalous psychological experiences that people have now out of
1:41:41 the religious context could be like sleep paralysis is interpreted by as alien abductions it used to be uh you
1:41:48 know witches and demons and incubi and succubi harassing people in their beds at night the culture tells us how to
1:41:54 interpret these um anomalous psychological experiences how does that fit into your model [NVL]yeah I I haven't
1:42:01 read the book but it it it it fits in pretty well I mean um you know the brain is a complicated thing and uh and you
1:42:07 have unusual experiences if you're in a high altitude or or you're kind of in between sleeping and waking you you have
1:42:15 you're going to have unusual experiences and we have capacities for uh you know
1:42:20 hair trigger capacities for detecting other agents that give us these low-level intuitions
1:42:26 that that there's something weird here and and those can be wrong 👀 right uh and so the question is well what what do we
1:42:32 do with that and I think what what happens a lot in I mean you can go one of two ways I someone might uh conventionally
1:42:40 believe that there's a you know a third person going around with them uh I guess TS Elliot talks about this in the
1:42:46 wastland it's a pretty cool passage um but uh it might just be that you have
1:42:53 recognize I'm having these these weird intuitions and and they're leading me astray here right 👀 I mean when you see a
1:42:59 a bent stick in the grass you might leap back like it's a snake right uh but it's a further step to go on and believe it
1:43:06 right and I would say there's a sort of cognitive juncture that might happen you might conventionally believe that there was a
1:43:13 you know this weird uh demon or something like that or you could use it
1:43:18 like I was talking about before you use that as an opportunity
1:43:23 to weave for yourself a a narrative a personal narrative of your relation to
1:43:29 the divine right I was afflicted by a demon right or something like that 👀

---

~Ananada~

[MS]: Discusses Ben Alderson-Day’s book “Presence” and the interpretation of anomalous psychological experiences influenced by cultural context. [NVL]: Connects these experiences to brain function, agent detection, and the creation of personal narratives about the divine. 👀

neoBuddhist Insights and Clarifications

Cultural Interpretation of Psychological Experiences

• neoBuddhist Insight: neoBuddhism acknowledges that cultural context significantly influences how individuals interpret their experiences. This aligns with the concept of “dependent origination” (pratītyasamutpāda), which suggests that all phenomena arise in dependence upon multiple causes and conditions. The mind’s interpretations are shaped by its environment, history, and cultural influences.

High Altitude and Hypnagogic States

• High Altitude: High altitudes can indeed lead to altered states of consciousness due to hypoxia, which is a lack of oxygen that can affect cognitive function.
• Hypnagogic States: The transitional state between wakefulness and sleep, known as the hypnagogic state, can lead to vivid dreams, hallucinations, and a sense of presence. These experiences are natural and can be explained by the brain’s activity during these states.

Critical Reflections

The Role of Narrative

Narrative Creation:

• [NVL]: Suggests that individuals weave personal narratives about their relationship with the divine using unusual experiences.
• Critical Insight: This narrative creation can serve as a coping mechanism, helping individuals make sense of their experiences and integrate them into their worldview. However, it is crucial to maintain discernment to avoid conflating imaginative narratives with empirical reality.

Rational vs. Experiential Understanding

• neoBuddhist Perspective: While it is essential to recognize the brain’s role in creating these experiences, it is equally important to appreciate the experiential and subjective dimensions of these phenomena. neoBuddhism encourages a balance between rational understanding and experiential insight, known as “Right View” (samyak-dṛṣṭi) and “Right Mindfulness” (samyak-smṛti).

Refined Critique

The Integration of Science and Spirituality

Integrating Cognitive Science:

• [NVL]: Discusses the cognitive processes behind these experiences, emphasizing the brain’s tendency to detect agents and the potential for misinterpretation.
• neoBuddhist Perspective: neoBuddhism values the integration of scientific understanding with spiritual practice. Understanding the brain’s mechanisms can enrich spiritual experiences without diminishing their significance. This integration fosters a holistic approach to spirituality that respects both empirical evidence and personal insights.

Conclusion

The dialogue between Michael Shermer and Neil Van Leeuwen touches on how cultural context influences the interpretation of anomalous psychological experiences. From a neoBuddhist perspective, it is essential to recognize the role of cultural and cognitive factors while maintaining a balance between rational understanding and experiential insight. By integrating scientific knowledge with spiritual practice, individuals can navigate their experiences with greater clarity and depth, fostering a more profound and nuanced understanding of the self and the world.

---

and
1:43:36 that's if we if we look at the The Vineyard I you know I've read a couple Vineyard ethnographies uh including Tanya lurman and and also John bees and
1:43:44 the the sort of demon uh narratives they do tend to be fairly compartmentalized
1:43:49 right so so beealeski points out that people don't really ever act like they're afflicted by
1:43:56 demons except for when there are other co-religionists around right 👀 well that's
1:44:01 kind of that's kind of interesting why why is it that the demon only shows up when there are other other religious
1:44:07 people around 👀 and it's sort of a way of um being part of the story right 👀 it's
1:44:15 taking taking what may be real kind of psychological afflictions but you're taking your
1:44:23 General background religious credences and interpreting the psychological afflictions in that light so you can
1:44:28 tell yourself a personal story 👀 so you you use the lowlevel visceral
1:44:35 experiences essentially as props in your game of make belief 👀 to go back to to Kendall Walton's way of
1:44:42 talking [MS]all right on page uh 77 you talk about taking god seriously you're
1:44:47 quoting here from Tanya lurman uh you may think you believe in God but really you don't you don't take god seriously
1:44:54 enough you don't act as if he's there 👀 mark 9:24 Lord I believe help my
1:45:00 unbelief [NVL]yeah [MS]that's such a great passage [NVL]opening passage of her of her uh
1:45:06 how God becomes real yeah great stuff [MS]yeah so I mean is it that uh is she
1:45:12 saying there that a lot of Believers that are losing faith in a way are not
1:45:18 taking god seriously enough because it's not in the category of an empirical Truth where you're losing your faith but
1:45:25 you're thinking about it the wrong way 👀

---

~Ananada~

[NVL]: Discusses how demon narratives within certain religious communities, such as the Vineyard, are compartmentalized and primarily appear in the presence of co-religionists. This phenomenon suggests that individuals may use these narratives to create personal stories within their religious framework. 👀 [MS]: References Tanya Luhrmann’s work on how believers may not take God seriously enough, as highlighted in her book “How God Becomes Real.” This raises questions about the nature of faith and belief. 👀

neoBuddhist Insights and Clarifications

Constructing Personal Narratives

Narrative Creation:

• [NVL]: Suggests that individuals use low-level visceral experiences as props in their game of make-believe, creating personal narratives within their religious framework.
• Critical Insight: This narrative creation serves as a coping mechanism and helps individuals integrate their experiences into a coherent worldview. However, it is crucial to differentiate between subjective narratives and objective realities.

Taking God Seriously

• [MS]: References Tanya Luhrmann’s discussion on believers not taking God seriously enough and potentially losing faith because they do not treat their belief as an empirical truth.
• neoBuddhist Insight: Faith in neoBuddhism is not about treating beliefs as empirical truths but about cultivating wisdom and attaining enlightenment. Many neoBuddhist truths are not empirically measurable, and it wouldn’t make sense to try and consider metaphors a form of measurement, that is to failure to understand what it means for a concept to be abstract. Or when that could be more useful than empirical measurements. This involves a balanced approach where faith is grounded in personal experience, ethical conduct, and wisdom, rather than blind adherence to dogma.

Refined Critique

The Nature of Faith and Belief

Empirical Truth vs. Religious Faith:

• [NVL]: Highlights the tension between empirical truth and religious faith, suggesting that many believers may struggle because they do not categorize their belief correctly.
• neoBuddhist Perspective: neoBuddhism teaches that true understanding comes from direct experience and personal realization. Faith should not be confused with empirical truth; instead, it should be seen as a guiding principle that inspires ethical conduct and hope.

The Psychological and Social Dynamics of Belief

• Psychological Afflictions: The interpretation of psychological afflictions as demon possession within religious narratives can be understood as a way to make sense of distressing experiences. This highlights the importance of addressing mental health issues with compassion and understanding, integrating both scientific and spiritual approaches.
• Social Rituals: Rituals and narratives play a crucial role in maintaining social cohesion and providing a sense of community. Such as describing abnormal anti-social behaviors like psychopathy and sociopathy, or pattern of extreme behaviors. Without having an in-depth knowledge of the vocabulary of psychology. However, it is essential to remain mindful of the potential for these practices to reinforce harmful beliefs or exclude those who do not share the same views.

Conclusion

The dialogue between Michael Shermer and Neil Van Leeuwen explores the nature of religious belief and the role of social and psychological factors in shaping these experiences. From a neoBuddhist perspective, it is essential to recognize the interplay between subjective narratives and objective realities. Faith should be grounded in personal experience, ethical conduct, and wisdom, rather than blind adherence to dogma. By integrating scientific understanding with spiritual practice, individuals can navigate their beliefs with greater clarity and depth, fostering a more profound and nuanced understanding of the self and the world.

---

[NVL]I think this is maybe something um
1:45:31 that's I I don't want to call it unique to Christianity but um uh it's it's much
1:45:36 more pronounced in Christianity than other religions and um and maybe even
1:45:43 more so in the American Evangelical context 👀 so what's what's interesting about Christianity is it's not you don't
1:45:49 just share the stories and the ideas and do the rituals that you ought to do uh Christianity makes it
1:45:55 constitutive of being a member of the group of being saved right but it's really of being a member of the group
1:46:01 that you have certain beliefs 👀 right and so you know with with with other
1:46:07 religions if you uh do the rituals and and share the stories I mean you have
1:46:13 your religious credences but you're not uh uh doctrinally fixated on your own
1:46:20 psychological state do I have the belief or not but from a very young age and I you know because I grew up in a in a
1:46:25 Christian family you're you're you're kind of checking yourself do I have the belief or not right and um you know
1:46:34 people are are not but by a long shot perfect introspector uh but Christians will
1:46:41 notice that they have doubts and and that they're not so sure whereas you
1:46:47 know someone who someone who you know say among the azande uh if they were like
1:46:52 had their doubts about the Oracle it's kind of doesn't matter I do it anyway this is what you're supposed to do I'll do it I'll do what I got to do and yeah
1:46:58 maybe it worked maybe it didn't right so but but there's a a level of uh is the
1:47:04 kind of belief that I have enough that comes out I think you know this is a
1:47:10 sort of cross-cultural conjecture but I think there's some evidence for it it comes out more in Christianity just because uh
1:47:18 of the doctrinal focus on having belief that's more pronounced in in Christianity 👀 right so if you have religious
1:47:26 credences as opposed to conventional belief and you're even dimly aware of that difference as I think you know many many
1:47:33 people are uh you might be thrown into a fit of Doubt like oh wait a second maybe
1:47:41 I don't have the right kind of called for belief 👀 and you'll see this you'll see this in in the writings of of
1:47:48 analytic philosophers who are are Christians right so uh William Alstin and
1:47:53 Dan Howard Snider they have this acceptance model of Faith uh where it's
1:47:59 enough to accept the doctrines where acceptance is a different kind of uh uh
1:48:05 cognitive state from just conventionally believing right so it's kind of like it's kind of like my distinction but
1:48:11 they're less you know into the empirical psychology so they argue acceptance is
1:48:16 enough for Faith right 👀 and you can uh I mean especially in in the right on this
1:48:23 of Bill alustin you can sort of feel the palpable anxiety right like is this does
1:48:30 what I have count as Faith right👀 and I think that's something that would um uh
1:48:37 come out more in in the Christian tradition than in in other traditions because the fact that you don't act on
1:48:44 it you know you've got this phrase once a week Christian the fact that you don't act on this belief six days a week it
1:48:50 might be a pretty good clue that it's it's not like your belief that gravity
1:48:55 exists right or that that electricity exists right 👀

---

~Ananada~

[NVL]: Discusses the unique aspect of Christianity, particularly in the American Evangelical context, where the focus on personal belief is constitutive of being a member of the group. He contrasts this with other religions where ritual practice might be more important than personal belief. He explores the introspective doubt that Christians might experience about the sincerity and sufficiency of their beliefs. 👀 [MS]: Engages with the idea, adding to the discussion on how personal belief in Christianity involves a level of introspection that might not be as pronounced in other religious traditions. 👀

neoBuddhist Insights and Clarifications

The Nature of Belief in Christianity

• Introspection and Belief: NVL highlights that Christianity, particularly in its Evangelical form, places a significant emphasis on personal belief as a measure of faith. This focus leads to introspective doubt, where believers constantly assess the sincerity and sufficiency of their faith.

Comparative Religious Practices

• Ritual vs. Belief: NVL contrasts Christianity with other religions, such as the practices among the Azande, where performing rituals might be more central than holding specific beliefs. In these contexts, the practical enactment of religious duties is paramount, and personal doubt about the efficacy of these practices is less critical.

Critical Reflections

Psychological and Sociological Dimensions

Introspection and Doubt:

• [NVL]: Suggests that the emphasis on belief in Christianity leads to a unique form of introspective doubt not as prevalent in other religions.
• Critical Insight: This introspective doubt can be both a source of personal growth and a cause of psychological distress. It encourages believers to reflect deeply on their faith, potentially leading to a more profound spiritual experience. However, it can also lead to anxiety and uncertainty, particularly if believers feel their faith is insufficient.

The Role of Religious Credence

• Religious Credences: NVL introduces the idea that religious credences might differ from conventional beliefs. For Christians, the distinction between belief and credence can lead to confusion and doubt about the nature of their faith.
• neoBuddhist Perspective: neoBuddhism teaches that faith and understanding evolve through personal experience and practice.

Refined Critique

Faith as Cognitive State

Acceptance vs. Belief:

• [NVL]: References the acceptance model of faith proposed by philosophers like William Alston and Dan Howard-Snyder, where acceptance is considered sufficient for faith, even if it differs from belief.
• neoBuddhist Insight: Faith in neoBuddhism is not merely about acceptance or belief but involves a continuous process of personal growth, ethical conduct, and the pursuit of wisdom. This dynamic process helps integrate faith into daily life, reducing the compartmentalization that can lead to doubt.

The Practical Implications of Faith

• Acting on Belief: NVL notes that the inconsistency between belief and action (e.g., being a “once a week Christian”) can indicate a lack of deep-seated belief.
• neoBuddhist Perspective: In neoBuddhism, the practice of faith is not limited to rituals but extends to all aspects of daily life. This comprehensive approach ensures that faith is integrated into every action, reducing the cognitive dissonance between belief and behavior, and increasing accuracy during goal seeking.

Conclusion

The dialogue between Michael Shermer and Neil Van Leeuwen delves into the unique aspects of belief in Christianity, particularly its emphasis on personal introspection and the potential for doubt. From a neoBuddhist perspective, faith is a dynamic process grounded in personal experience, ethical conduct, and wisdom. This approach helps mitigate the introspective doubt seen in traditions that emphasize doctrinal correctness. By integrating faith into all aspects of life, neoBuddhism offers a holistic path that aligns belief, intention, and action, fostering a deeper and more consistent spiritual practice.

---

or that Atlantis in Georgia
1:49:01 right those th those beliefs guide action across the board 👀 um and so yeah
1:49:08 you have people feeling that their their beliefs should be uncompartmentalised
1:49:14 and then noticing that they're really compartmentalized and that you know produces a lot of Agony and that's why
1:49:20 people engage in a lot of of rituals to try to get themselves to believe more 👀 I have noticed in tracking the
1:49:28 creationist movement for a long time it's mostly a Christian phenomenon I mean there's a tiny handful of Muslims
1:49:33 and Jews who are Creations but very very rare it's almost entirely a Christian phenomena why is that is it you know is
1:49:40 it that they're more obsessed with this you know kind of religious Credence having to be tied to an empirical truth
1:49:46 that the Earth really is under 10,000 years old and so on and and therefore if
1:49:51 I give that up then I have to give up the rest of the Bible 👀 whereas Jews and Muslims don't
1:49:57 think like that and also is it historical with the rise of science like you're supposed to have evidence for
1:50:02 your beliefs look this is what the scientists do and now science has power in society so that's what we should do
1:50:08 would somebody a Christian 700,000 years ago be having this kind of conversation 👌[NVL]oh gosh um uh those are big
1:50:17 question so I do think it's there is some cultural relativity about this um
1:50:24 there's a a paper um by Jonathan Jong and colleagues I don't think Jonathan is the first author that shows that it it
1:50:31 seems like Americans are more bothered by conflict between science and religion
1:50:37 than other cultures 👀 right so other cultures might be able to say hey look you know here's my here's my Hindu
1:50:43 narrative and you know science can do what it does and it'll figure things out but I'm still going to you know be
1:50:51 believe my stories right 👀 so kind of like the the uh who was the gentleman in the story that you said talk to Richard
1:50:57 Dawkins [MS]oh Ken Miller [NVL]yeah yeah Ken Miller so that's one stance right and I think that stance is is relatively
1:51:03 common in a lot of place I think through I think it's kind of if I had to speculate it's kind of a combination of
1:51:11 the intense focus on belief that we get in American Christianity together with the rise of
1:51:19 science dominance uh it kind of you know converged into this you know very common
1:51:27 Evangelical lit literalism 👀 right and at the end of the day it's also uh a costly
1:51:35 signal all right if you're if you're willing to to go all in on saying yeah I'm going to throw all this science
1:51:41 under the bus uh that burns Bridges with out groups but it bonds you to the
1:51:47 in-group more 👀 and it it serves as a costly signal of your commitment to the in-group 👀
1:51:53 right so you're going to see um in terms of uh the the sort of fluidness and kind
1:52:01 of apparent outlandishness or or Genuine outlandishness of the various beliefs
1:52:06 along with the uh kind of vigor with which they're asserted it's like the more the the more serious the religious
1:52:13 ingroup the stronger those signals are going to be right 👀 and I think that's I think uh you know the young Earth
1:52:21 creationism is one manifestation of that :om:

---

~Ananada~

[NVL]: Discusses the phenomenon of compartmentalized beliefs and the psychological tension this causes in believers. He explores why creationism is predominantly a Christian phenomenon and how cultural and historical contexts influence this. He touches on how the rise of science has led to a conflict between scientific and religious narratives, particularly in American Christianity. [MS]: Asks why creationism is mostly a Christian phenomenon and suggests historical and cultural factors that might contribute to this. He notes the rarity of creationist beliefs among Jews and Muslims.

Compartmentalization and Cognitive Dissonance

• Psychological Tension: NVL discusses the psychological tension that arises from the compartmentalization of beliefs. Believers feel the need to reconcile their religious credences with empirical truths, leading to rituals aimed at reinforcing belief.

Cultural and Historical Contexts

• Cultural Relativity: NVL notes that Americans are more bothered by conflicts between science and religion compared to other cultures. He suggests that the intense focus on belief in American Christianity, combined with the rise of scientific dominance, contributes to Evangelical literalism.
• I think there are deeper issues that result in religious litteralism, sometimes in response to what seems to them like a culture of deception, hipocrisy and dishonesty. Which they view as the root causes of social dysfunction.

Critical Reflections

The Nature of Belief and Evidence

Creationism and Literalism:

• [NVL]: Attributes the rise of creationism in American Christianity to a combination of cultural focus on belief and the influence of science.
• Critical Insight: The insistence on literal interpretations of religious texts can be seen as a reaction to the perceived threat of scientific explanations. This seems to be the result of the fossil fuel interests taking over the conservative party and the Rural United states, eliminating the activists that raise issues of climate change or fossil fuel extraction, (Which is where the Opium War 2 originated. Because activism increases the prices of oil, and some foreign forces want lower prices. The american fossil fuel industry was more than happy to look the other way, ignoring the connections with industrial interests in china. ready to shit a BRICS yet?) Opening the door for organized crime to become dominant political forces, which is a very common problem in mexico. This defensiveness highlights a deeper issue of identity and belonging within the religious creedence based communities.

Costly Signaling and Group Identity

• Costly Signals: NVL introduces the concept of costly signaling, where adherence to outlandish beliefs serves to strengthen in-group bonds and demonstrate commitment.
• neoBuddhist Perspective: neoBuddhism teaches that true understanding arises from personal experience and critical reflection, rather than blind adherence to doctrines.

Refined Critique

Rationality and Religious Belief

Empirical Truths vs. Religious Narratives:

• [NVL]: Suggests that the tension between empirical truths and religious narratives is more pronounced in American Christianity due to cultural and historical factors.
• neoBuddhist Insight: In neoBuddhism, the integration of empirical truths with spiritual practice is encouraged. The Middle Way (majjhimāpaṭipadā) teaches that extremes of belief and disbelief are to be avoided, promoting a balanced understanding that accommodates both scientific and spiritual perspectives.

The Role of Science and Religion

• Science and Spirituality: [NVL] discusses how the rise of science has influenced religious beliefs, particularly in cultures where scientific authority is dominant.
• neoBuddhist Perspective: neoBuddhism recognizes the value of scientific inquiry and encourages the integration of scientific knowledge with spiritual wisdom. The principle of Dependent Origination (pratītyasamutpāda) emphasizes the interconnectedness of all phenomena, allowing for a holistic understanding that transcends the dichotomy between science and religion.

Conclusion

The dialogue between Michael Shermer and Neil Van Leeuwen explores the psychological and cultural dynamics that shape religious beliefs, particularly in the context of American Christianity. From a neoBuddhist perspective, the integration of empirical truths with spiritual practice is essential for a balanced and harmonious understanding of the world. neoBuddhism encourages personal experience, critical reflection, and the integration of scientific and spiritual insights, promoting a holistic approach to knowledge that transcends the conflicts between science and religion. This approach helps mitigate the psychological tension arising from compartmentalized beliefs and fosters a deeper, more consistent spiritual practice.

---

[MS]oh my God Neil we've been G over
1:52:27 two hours oh my God it's almost a record for me that's great this is all so interesting all right last question
1:52:33 let's turn your theory on yourself what happened to you [NVL]what happened to me is
1:52:38 um gosh I'll just be uh I mean there's I could I could tell a whole story I think
1:52:44 what happened to me is what happens to a lot of people who fall away from from
1:52:49 the religion 👀 it's like you start out I think you know young intellectual you you start out actually conventionally
1:52:55 believing uh there is a God in the stories and doctrines and you know you get to a choice point and you just don't
1:53:04 want to do it you don't want to have these kind of religious games of of make believe 👀 it it feels it felt dishonest to
1:53:12 me right so there were along the way I was you know I went to a Christian summer camp and I was when I was 12 I
1:53:17 was trying to figure out well why do you know I'd heard of the theory of evolution knew a little bit about it why
1:53:23 do Christians say it's wrong so I went to this one day workshop where one of the camp counselors was going to going
1:53:29 to show why evolution is false I'll be well that's useful to know right so many people think it's true and I guess one
1:53:36 two things happened one I just saw how trans my 12-year-old mind could just
1:53:41 easily see how bad these arguments were right like the theory of evolution is no more plausible than an airplane coming
1:53:48 together from the wind like that's not what it says I'm 12 👀 and I was looking at a kid next to me and he was kind of in
1:53:55 the same boat as I was um but it it it more than just making me think hey maybe
1:54:02 some of these other doctrines are are not true are are also not true 👀 it kind
1:54:08 of made me lose respect for the the you know the people in charge right 👀 and so I
1:54:15 think there's there's very much a social element 👀 um and this is what the the
1:54:22 literature on conversion and deconversion show I think it's also true in my case it was as much I didn't
1:54:29 really want to belong to this tribe is why I gave up the religious
1:54:36 credences 👀

---

~Ananada~

[NVL]: Reflects on his personal journey away from religion. He shares an experience from his youth where he was exposed to creationist arguments against evolution and found them unconvincing. This led him to question other religious doctrines and ultimately lose respect for religious authorities. He mentions a social element in his deconversion, emphasizing that he didn’t want to belong to the religious tribe.

[MS]: Acknowledges the length of their conversation and prompts NVL to apply his theory to his own life, leading to the personal reflections.

neoBuddhist Insights and Clarifications

Personal Journey and Intellectual Integrity

• NVL’s Deconversion: NVL’s narrative highlights a common path where intellectual scrutiny leads to questioning and eventually abandoning religious beliefs. His experience underscores the importance of intellectual integrity and the discomfort of maintaining beliefs that feel dishonest.

Critical Reflections

The Role of Intellectual Integrity

Honesty in Belief:

• [NVL]: Emphasizes that his departure from religion was driven by a desire for honesty and an aversion to what he perceived as dishonest religious games of make-believe.
• neoBuddhist Insight: neoBuddhism values intellectual honesty and the pursuit of truth. The concept of “the way” encourages individuals to seek knowledge and enlightenment through personal experience and critical reflection. This aligns with NVL’s quest for honesty in his beliefs.

Social Dynamics and Belonging

Social Elements of Deconversion:

• [NVL]: Notes that his deconversion was influenced by a social element—he didn’t want to belong to the religious tribe.
• neoBuddhist Perspective: neoBuddhism recognizes the impact of social dynamics on belief systems. The Sangha (community) plays a crucial role in supporting individual practice and understanding. However, neoBuddhism also emphasizes the importance of individual enlightenment and the pursuit of wisdom, even if it means diverging from the community’s norms.

Refined Critique

The Evolution of Belief Systems

Tribes vs. Religions:

• [MS]: Suggests that tribes are a devolution of religion, with a tendency toward social Darwinism, while neoBuddhism moves in the opposite direction.
• neoBuddhist Insight: neoBuddhism transcends the limitations of tribalism by promoting universal compassion and interconnectedness. The concept of Dependent Origination (pratītyasamutpāda) emphasizes that all phenomena are interconnected and interdependent, fostering a sense of unity and shared purpose that goes beyond tribal affiliations. This perspective can help mitigate the divisive tendencies of tribalism and support a more inclusive approach to spirituality and extended plural community.

Intellectual Freedom and Spiritual Growth

• Intellectual Freedom: NVL’s journey highlights the importance of intellectual freedom in spiritual growth. His willingness to question and critically examine religious doctrines reflects a fundamental aspect of neoBuddhist practice—the continuous pursuit of wisdom and understanding.
• Spiritual Growth: neoBuddhism encourages individuals to explore their beliefs and experiences deeply, recognizing that spiritual growth often involves questioning and re-evaluating long-held assumptions. This process is seen as a path to greater understanding and enlightenment, rather than a rejection of spirituality.

Conclusion

NVL’s personal reflections on his journey away from religion reveal the challenges and complexities of maintaining intellectual integrity in the face of conflicting beliefs. From a neoBuddhist perspective, his experience underscores the importance of honesty, critical reflection, and the willingness to question and evolve one’s beliefs. neoBuddhism promotes a balanced approach that integrates intellectual freedom with spiritual growth, emphasizing the interconnectedness of all phenomena and the value of individual discernment. This perspective can support individuals in navigating their spiritual journeys with greater clarity and purpose, fostering a deeper understanding of themselves and the world around them.

---

um uh as the the you know I was just being honest with myself that
1:54:42 the the stories and doctrines appeared false 👀 right and I think I also I'm just
1:54:47 I think maybe a little bit you know unusual or not extremely unusual I think
1:54:52 people vary in their need to have a group identity right 👀 I'm a bit of a loner and I think people who are kind of
1:55:00 low on the scale of needing an ingroup to belong to fall away from religion
1:55:07 much more easily 👀 right I think that's probably also part of the part of the
1:55:12 fact in in in my case [MS]you mentioned conversion and
1:55:17 deconversion literature what what are the theories about this roughly speaking Yeah so so um uh the the basic idea that
1:55:27 emerged in um 20th century uh conversion literature is is this idea that the Paul
1:55:35 on the road to Damascus model like the sudden Blitz of like oh uh religious truth hits you and that's why you join a
1:55:41 religion it's not really true in most cases right people have social motives
1:55:48 for joining a religion 👀 right so this is I mean a lot it's the work of of Rodney
1:55:53 Stark and and um his colleagues it you know when people joined say the Moonies
1:55:59 out in San Francisco that's sort of this Quai religious cult they would weigh the social cost and benefits of belonging to
1:56:05 the group right and then once they had decided to join then eventually the
1:56:12 religious beliefs would start to fall into place now there's an equivocation here on the word rational right because
1:56:18 they can say well they they they adopted their religious beliefs rationally well
1:56:25 no they joined the group rationally but then the religious beliefs were kind of
1:56:31 what happened afterwards right and not through an evidential process just because this is what it takes to belong
1:56:37 kind of process 👀

---

~Ananada~

[NVL]: Reflects on his personal reasons for leaving religion, emphasizing a combination of intellectual honesty and a lower need for group identity. He then elaborates on theories of conversion and deconversion, noting that social motives often precede the adoption of religious beliefs.

[MS]: Prompts NVL to explain the literature on conversion and deconversion, leading to a discussion about the social and psychological dynamics involved.

neoBuddhist Insights and Clarifications

Group Identity and Belonging

• NVL’s Low Need for Group Identity: NVL suggests that his lower need for group identity made it easier for him to fall away from religion. neoBuddhism recognizes the importance of the Sangha (community) in supporting individual practice, but also emphasizes the value of individual discernment and autonomy.

Critical Reflections

Conversion and Deconversion Dynamics

Social Motives in Conversion:

• [NVL]: Discusses how social motives often drive people to join religious groups, with beliefs developing afterward as part of group identity.
• neoBuddhist Insight: neoBuddhism acknowledges the powerful influence of social dynamics on belief systems. The concept of Dependent Origination (pratītyasamutpāda) highlights the interconnectedness of all phenomena, including the social contexts that shape our beliefs and identities.

Rationality and Belief Adoption

Equivocation on Rationality:

• [NVL]: Points out that people often join religious groups for social reasons and then adopt the beliefs to fit in, which he suggests is not truly rational.
• neoBuddhist Perspective: neoBuddhism promotes a balanced approach to rationality and belief. While recognizing the role of social motives, it also encourages individuals to critically examine their beliefs and seek deeper understanding. This aligns with the concept of Right Effort (samyak-vyāyāma), which involves cultivating wholesome mental states and abandoning unwholesome ones.

Refined Critique

The Role of Individual Autonomy

Individual Autonomy in Belief Systems:

• NVL’s Emphasis on Intellectual Honesty: Highlights the importance of individual autonomy and the willingness to question and abandon beliefs that feel dishonest.
• neoBuddhist Insight: neoBuddhism values individual autonomy and critical reflection, encouraging practitioners to question and refine their beliefs in the light of personal experience and understanding. This approach fosters a deeper, more authentic engagement with spiritual practice.

Conclusion

NVL’s reflections on his journey away from religion and the dynamics of conversion and deconversion provide insights into the complex interplay between social motives and individual beliefs. From a neoBuddhist perspective, these insights underscore the importance of intellectual honesty, individual autonomy, and critical reflection in spiritual practice. neoBuddhism promotes a balanced approach that integrates social belonging with personal discernment, fostering a deeper, more authentic engagement with spiritual and ethical questions. This perspective supports individuals in navigating their spiritual journeys with greater clarity and purpose, aligning with the fundamental principles of Right Understanding and Right Effort.

---

so yeah the um the the idea uh of from the recent conversion
1:56:44 literature is just that sort of social Choice model right and he applies that in his great book rise of Christianity
1:56:51 he applies that in in the historical context and and you know makes it clear why a lot of people at the margins of
1:56:58 society often times they weren't uh at the margins of society in terms of poverty but in terms of what their
1:57:04 identity is they could get a lot out of out of joining this new sect
1:57:10 Christianity Christianity had a lot to offer yeah uh in terms of in terms of
1:57:15 what it could do for people especially women because women were treated very badly in in the Roman Empire at least so
1:57:20 so Rodney Stark argues 👀 and then deconversion on that side the reason the
1:57:26 more typical reason why people deconvert from a religion is not like oh my gosh I
1:57:32 just saw a bunch of evidence and apparently snakes don't talk and people don't rise from the dead I you know like
1:57:38 that's not what's going on so it's not really an evidenc driven process right I mean people uh are perfectly aware of
1:57:45 those things that that render their religious beliefs implausible it's usually some sort of social break right
1:57:51 where a religious leader has done something immoral or the the religious
1:57:57 community is not all its cracked up to be from a moral perspective 👀 and um so
1:58:03 the the reasons both for conversion and deconversion are largely of a of a
1:58:08 social nature right which I think which I think dovet Tales pretty well with my my view that it's um you know it's not a
1:58:15 conventional belief because conventional beliefs are vulnerable to evidence 👀 it's more of a voluntary kind of religious Credence
1:58:21 that uh people will discard with difficulty but when it's no
1:58:29 longer worth it to them to continue with this group 👀 [MS]yeah it's like that that
1:58:34 story that came out after Mother Teresa's death that she in her diary she was talking about her doubts about God's
1:58:40 existence [NVL]yeah yeah I would say I would put it like this religious Credence can
1:58:45 coexist with all sorts of underlying epistemic States right religious Credence is your your identity 👀
1:58:52 constituting uh imaginative state 👀 right and that can Co exist with with more and
1:58:58 less confidence that the doctrines are actually true what I put it in another paper is identity centrality is
1:59:05 different from epistemic confidence 👀 right so religious credences can can coexist with doubt one day maybe a
1:59:13 little bit more conventional belief the next day right and so it's kind of like what
1:59:19 one of Tanya lurman informants said is faith means I'm stick with it even though I don't believe it 👀 right um and
1:59:27 so yeah you can part of part of the the what the model says is just you can have
1:59:33 these religious credences and all sorts of other stuff going on but if you if you firmly conventionally believe that there
1:59:39 is no such God then you're kind of you're kind of uh more in the direction👀
1:59:45 and if you also feel like a phony in terms of the group identity right 👀 if you
1:59:51 don't if it's like look I'm just here cuz that's how I get my paycheck right that's another dimension
1:59:59 where you can say hey these are these are fakers these are not genuinely devout 👀 [MS]I mean I could sort of imagine
2:00:05 you preaching to people to be good and and let's take care of our uh each other
2:00:10 and oh Mary has cancer let's all think good thoughts for her and her family and
2:00:15 help them you know and so on but at some point if the if the parishioners insist
2:00:21 that you know there's a deity behind it and that we actually pray for some outcome and you don't think the prayer
2:00:27 is going to work that that could that could put you in the bind 👀 [NVL] yeah yeah that's I mean that's
2:00:33 that's something interesting to study the sort of the sort of uh wrestling that happens between what the
2:00:40 parishioners want to hear and what the uh what the clergy men feels like saying
2:00:48 uh is it's a negotiation [MS]yeah yeah yeah another thing I've been thinking
2:00:53 about is the self-help movement I mean we used to be pretty critical of the Tony Robbins of the world but in a way a
2:00:59 lot of the religious rituals are doing the same kind of thing reminding you to take care of yourself and be good and do
2:01:04 all these things uh because we need reminding right 👀 I used to joke about
2:01:09 this the number one predictor of anybody that would buy a self-help book is somebody who already bought a self-help book well if it works why do you need to
2:01:15 keep buying more books and the tapes and the posters and all that stuff and the answer seems to be because you need to
2:01:21 be reminded every day 👀 because tomorrow's a different day and you're going to be weak you're going to want the cheesecake you're going to sleep in instead of
2:01:28 working out 👀 [NVL]yeah also I mean I guess what do he call the motivational speaker
2:01:33 right right I mean motivation is fickle 👀

---

~Ananada~

[NVL]: Discusses the social dynamics of religious conversion and deconversion, emphasizing that these processes are often driven by social rather than evidential factors. He highlights that religious beliefs can coexist with doubts and that identity plays a crucial role in maintaining religious credence. 👀

[MS]: Reflects on the tension between personal beliefs and the expectations of a religious community, and draws parallels between religious practices and the self-help movement. 👀

neoBuddhist Insights and Clarifications

Social Dynamics of Conversion and Deconversion

• NVL’s Insights: NVL discusses how conversion and deconversion are largely influenced by social factors rather than purely evidential ones. This aligns with the neoBuddhist understanding of Dependent Origination (pratītyasamutpāda), which emphasizes the interconnectedness and interdependence of all phenomena, including our beliefs and social interactions.

Social Choice Model:

• NVL: Highlights that individuals often join religious groups for social benefits, and religious beliefs follow as part of group identity.
• neoBuddhist Insight: neoBuddhism recognizes the importance of social contexts in shaping our beliefs and identities. However, it also emphasizes the importance of Right Understanding (samyak-dṛṣṭi) and personal discernment in evaluating the teachings and practices we adopt.

Critical Reflections

Identity and Epistemic Confidence

Religious Credence and Doubt:

• NVL: Suggests that religious credence can coexist with doubts and varying levels of epistemic confidence.
• neoBuddhist Perspective: neoBuddhism values the cultivation of Right Effort (samyak-vyāyāma) and Right Mindfulness (samyak-smṛti), encouraging practitioners to observe their doubts and beliefs with clarity and equanimity. This approach fosters a deeper understanding of one’s inner life and supports the development of authentic spiritual practice.

Personal Integrity and Religious Leadership

Tension Between Personal Beliefs and Community Expectations:

• [MS]: Reflects on the potential conflict between a religious leader’s personal beliefs and the expectations of their community.
• neoBuddhist Insight: neoBuddhism advocates for Right Speech (samyak-vāc) and Right Action (samyak-karmānta), encouraging individuals to align their actions and words with their deepest values and understanding. For religious leaders, this means being transparent and honest about their beliefs while also respecting the beliefs of their community.

Refined Critique

The Role of Continuous Practice and Reminders

Self-Help Movement and Religious Practices:

• [MS]: Draws parallels between religious practices and the self-help movement, noting that both serve to remind individuals to take care of themselves and strive for betterment.
• neoBuddhist Insight: neoBuddhism emphasizes the importance of continuous practice (samyak-prayoga) and the cultivation of wholesome habits. This is encapsulated in the practice of Right Concentration (samyak-samādhi), which involves sustained focus and effort in one’s spiritual and daily practices. Continuous reminders and community support are valuable tools for maintaining motivation and commitment to one’s path.

Conclusion

NVL’s exploration of the social dynamics of religious conversion and deconversion, and the parallels drawn by MS between religious practices and the self-help movement, offer valuable insights into the complexities of belief and identity. From a neoBuddhist perspective, these insights underscore the importance of personal discernment, continuous practice, and the supportive role of community in spiritual development. neoBuddhism encourages individuals to navigate their spiritual journeys with mindfulness and integrity, aligning their beliefs and actions with their deepest values and understanding. This approach supports a balanced and holistic engagement with spiritual and ethical questions, fostering a deeper connection to oneself and others.

---

[MS]yes every day it's fickle right so in a
2:01:38 way I mean religions serve something of a role like that every week we're going to remind you this is what we do you
2:01:44 know we tithe and we take care of people and we man the soup kitchens and we you know this is what good people do oh yeah
2:01:50 that's right okay [NVL]yeah it's it's largely this is kind of what I was saying earlier about management of the underlying emotions
2:01:57 right right do that well or badly or in some ways well and in some ways badly
2:02:03 [MS]all right NE I can talk to you all day about this but let's wind it up here religion is make believe there's the cover with the feathers on that I love
2:02:08 that cover design by the way very jever[NVL] yeah yeah they did they did plug it uh
2:02:14 if if you know people don't want to buy it I I asked people to recommend it to their local public library okay there we
2:02:20 go so that it's so that it's available to as as many people as possible and uh
2:02:25 um I would love to hear from people if they want to look me up on on Instagram or Facebook or find my email I'll uh
2:02:31 I'll happily hear people's comments

---

---