Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Søren has always kind of put me off to philosophy and existentialism. Creating foundations within religion as matter of fact then using it as a principal to state everything is meaningless... my mind couldn't make the connection.

You might be interested in André Comte-Sponville who takes pretty much the opposite direction on the same journey. What remains of Kierkegaard and Spinoza when you remove Christianity as a foundation of ethics.

Exactly. It's noncommittal, inconsistent and still at the mercy and vulnerability of magical thinking. The positive part was watering-down ideas enough to be palatable to those whom were predominantly religious. Reality is too much for most people to accept, so they lie to themselves and each other.

> still at the mercy and vulnerability of magical thinking

What magical thinking are you referring to?

religion = magical thinking

Well that's a silly thing to say. For the record, Kierkegaard doesn't claim to know or try to prove that god exist. Doubting is a crucial part of believing, and literally requires a "leap of faith" according to Kierkegaard. That's one of the major things that separates religious belief from for instance scientific knowledge. Also:

"Christian dogma, according to Kierkegaard, embodies paradoxes which are offensive to reason. The central paradox is the assertion that the eternal, infinite, transcendent God simultaneously became incarnated as a temporal, finite, human being (Jesus). There are two possible attitudes we can adopt to this assertion, viz. we can have faith, or we can take offense. What we cannot do, according to Kierkegaard, is believe by virtue of reason. If we choose faith we must suspend our reason in order to believe in something higher than reason. In fact we must believe by virtue of the absurd." https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kierkegaard/

Sure, but he goes on about religion a lot. And it's always been obvious to me that faith is foolish. I was reading Popper, Kuhn, Nietzsche, Camus, Kafka, Hesse and so on. And I had no patience for Kierkegaard's obsession with fantasy. I mean, I enjoy fantasy. But I know that it's fantasy.

Or, religion is, at least, a form of seeing meaning in things, which is the same category of activity as magical thinking.

It's seeing agency in things, and reality overall, I think.

You mean this idea? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_detection

There's another aspect to proto-religion which has to do with power rather than agency. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mana#Pre-animism

All this is speculative, AFAIK.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact