• JayDee@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    I’ve got a somewhat different take, but similar

    We are shedding light on the world through science and philosophy. We first figure out the most effective ways to think about things with philosophy, and then we apply that thought process with the scientific method to further our understanding.

    Eventually, we will always reach the shadows on the edge our understanding, whether personally or as a society. Past that point, we are really just making up apparitions in the dark, until we can shed light on that edge.

    That process of spotting forms in the dark is always going to be informed by some unfalsifiable ideation, either because we can’t test the ideas we have, or because the ideas we have are inherently unproveable.

    To me, it really doesn’t matter what kind of ideation you have past that point of shadow, be it religion or nihilism or panpsychism or determinism, but I hope that whatever idea you have faith in brings you solace and makes those dark forms in shadow less daunting.

    The problem comes, when you chose to be in the dark about something and apply faith-based arguments where light has already been shed, or when you use apparitions you made up as an excuse to do harm to others.