#seculars and folks of other religions frequently agree on that

[queenlucythevaliant]

All I want for Christmas is nothing but my favorite carols in church

[dailynewswebsite]

Donald Trump is hardly the ‘Republican Jesus’

U.S. President Donald Trump staged a go to in entrance of St. John's Church June 1 in Washington after authorities cleared protestors from the world, prompting the bishop overseeing the church to precise outrage. (AP Picture/Patrick Semansky)

It’s but unknown how U.S. President Donald Trump’s makes an attempt to place himself because the Christian candidate of selection will affect Christian voters in the US — and the way Democrats’ makes an attempt to talk to Christians could sway earlier Trump voters or these not publicly declaring their intentions.

‘Republican Jesus: How the Proper has Rewritten the Gospels’ (College of California Press)

“Dems need to shut your church buildings down, completely,” Trump tweeted in early October. Just a few days earlier, his son, Eric Trump, declared that his dad “actually saved Christianity.”

These statements match a wider sample: Trump has referred to as himself “the chosen one,” proclaimed that God is “on our aspect” and warned that Biden will “damage the Bible, damage God.”

The Trump administration and its Christian supporters have been utilizing Christianity to attract battle strains on this high-stakes election. This Republican political technique that makes use of Christian language to solid Trump as a divinely appointed protector of Christians warrants extra scrutiny than it’s obtained.

In my e book, Republican Jesus, I determine key tendencies in the way in which at the moment’s right-wing influencers interpret the Bible: they view Jesus as a prophet of free-market capitalism who opposes taxes and is in opposition to any regulation that helps social welfare applications, protects employees or prevents discrimination.

Sister Quincy Howard, centre, a Dominican nun, protests President Donald Trump at Saint John Paul II Nationwide Shrine, June 2, in Washington, after the president staged a go to to a church with a bible after authorities cleared the world of protesters. (AP Picture/Jacquelyn Martin)

Greater than faith

The Trump administration and their Christian supporters promote a type of Christianity that students name “Christian nationalism.” That’s an ideology that isn’t nearly faith, however “consists of assumptions of nativism, white supremacy, patriarchy and heteronormativity, together with divine sanction for authoritarian management and militarism,” in line with sociologists Andrew Whitehead and Samuel Perry.

They’ve demonstrated with survey information that about half of Individuals help some type of the concept that America is, and must be, a Christian nation. Christian nationalists are particularly keen on boundaries — not simply partitions, but additionally social boundaries that solid liberals as outsiders.

These sociologists say about 20 per cent of Individuals are “ambassadors,” an overwhelmingly white group that insists the U.S. has at all times been and should stay Christian. One other 30 per cent are “accommodators,” who lean towards supporting Christian nationalism however maintain considerably extra ambivalent views (for instance, they are saying that “Christian values” ought to affect society however would possibly permit that non-Christians additionally advance these values).

When pro-Trump Christians use the language of Christianity beneath siege, their foremost goal is to courtroom the votes of those “accommodators.”

Company backing

As historian Kevin M. Kruse argues, “the assumption that America is essentially and formally a Christian nation originated within the 1930s when businessmen enlisted non secular activists of their combat in opposition to FDR’s New Deal.” These corporate-funded conservatives claimed that the social security internet breaks the commandment to not steal — that the federal government steals taxes from people to reward the indolent.

They solid Christianity because the free-market antidote to “pagan stateism”: a menace they created to conflate progressive types of Christianity with communism, socialism and Nazism.

Dogmatic adherence to free-market capitalism and restricted authorities is the frequent thread within the historical past of the American Christian proper. By this logic, anybody who favours a extra regulated type of capitalism assaults Christianity.

Within the Civil Rights period, some non secular conservatives insisted that the desegregation of public colleges was authorities overreach and a risk to non secular freedom. Since Roe vs. Wade, they’ve characterised abortions as the federal government robbing unborn residents of their rights.

Politics of exclusion

On Sept. 26, Rev. Franklin Graham, son of Billy Graham and among the many most influential pro-Trump evangelicals, hosted an enormous prayer march that drew hundreds to Washington, D.C.

The printed’s chorus was “this isn’t a political occasion, however a prayer occasion.” But audio system repeatedly invoked the parable that America was based as a Christian nation because the march proceeded on a path by way of the Nationwide Mall (with no social distancing and restricted masks).

U.S. President Donald Trump with Rev. Franklin Graham after a funeral service for Billy Graham, in Charlotte, N.C., March 2018.‘ (AP Picture/Chuck Burton)

It was scheduled simply earlier than Trump’s announcement of a conservative Catholic choose who has ties to a charismatic and secretive Christian group as his Supreme Courtroom nominee later that day.

Each speaker was a vocal Trump supporter, Vice-President Mike Pence made a “shock go to,” and marchers wore each “Make America Nice Once more” and “Let’s Make America Godly Once more” hats and chanted “4 extra years!” Tony Perkins, president of the Household Analysis Council, prayed for regulation enforcement as a result of “lawlessness has been unleashed” in America — an indictment of the Black Lives Matter protests.

A political technique

It might be apparent that American Christian Democrats and a few Christians are outraged by pro-Trump Christians. However as an American educating Christianity at a public college in Canada, I’ve famous that plenty of my college students and colleagues who determine as “evangelicals” or “conservatives” are equally outraged by how Trump’s high evangelical advisers cherry-pick and deform biblical verses to justify xenophobic immigration insurance policies and restrictions on the federal government’s position in regulating well being care, environmental safety, gun management, employment and the social security internet.

Whereas conservative Christians outdoors the U.S. are likely to share the identical “household values” positions (conventional marriage, pro-life) as conservative American Christians, they’re much less usually inclined to agree with their financial conservatism.

The Christian nationalism and financial conservatism advocated by Trump could be perplexing to Christians unfamiliar with the American Christian proper’s historical past of studying the Bible as a blueprint for unfettered free-market capitalism on the expense of the poor. Within the New Testomony, in spite of everything, Jesus calls on the wealthy to promote their possessions and provides them to the poor, and speaks of loving one’s neighbours and enemies.

To some who advocate Jesus’s platform of social justice, advancing totally different views within the language of Christianity can warrant being referred to as a “pretend Christian” or a deluded devotee of the “cult of Trump.” I warning in opposition to these labels, nonetheless, since such exclusionary rhetoric diverts consideration from how the American proper is busy redefining what it means to be “Christian” for their very own political agenda.

The Rev. William J. Barber speaks throughout a rally protesting in opposition to President Donald Trump’s insurance policies in Washington, in June 2019.

Shaping the election?

Democrats’ efforts to problem the suitable’s try to personal Christian identification and values might be important within the ultimate days of the marketing campaign. Within the vice-presidential debate, Kamala Harris acknowledged: “Joe Biden and I are each folks of religion” in response to Mike Pence’s insinuation that Democrats are attacking Christianity. If it weren’t for the eye the suitable’s influencers obtain, Harris wouldn’t have needed to make this assertion.

The Poor Folks’s Marketing campaign: A Nationwide Name for Ethical Revival is asking for “coming collectively to confront the interlocking evils of systemic racism, poverty, ecological devastation, militarism and the warfare economic system, and the distorted ethical narrative of non secular nationalism.” Christian activists Rev. Dr. William J. Barber and Rev. Dr. Liz Theoharis helm this motion organized on the idea of values. It’s supported by interfaith our bodies like The Islamic Society of North America and the Motion Centre on Reform Judiasm.

In the meantime, the mainstream media, politically average and liberal Christian leaders and progressives on the entire should maintain the Christian proper accountable for his or her exclusionary doublespeak and their extremely selective readings of the Bible and American historical past.

Tony Keddie receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Analysis Council of Canada.

from Growth News https://growthnews.in/donald-trump-is-hardly-the-republican-jesus/ via https://growthnews.in

[glittergummicandypeach]

Recovery and Religion: Conflict and Solutions

Many people with addiction struggle with the idea of organized religion. And, many organized religions struggle with outdated ideas of addiction.What can the recovery community and church communities do to knock down some of these walls? Is it even necessary?What better place to begin to explore such a volatile topic than a faith-based college campus like Baylor University? Baylor is a conservative, Baptist institution founded in 1845 in Waco, Texas. While the university is founded on Baptist traditions, the student body is diverse. Baylor’s Beauchamp Addiction Recovery Center (BARC) faces these challenges daily.Imagine you are a student at a university like Baylor. Consider these three addiction recovery dilemmas:Let’s say you’ve been raised in a religious atmosphere where addiction is still viewed as a moral failing. You think you have a drinking problem, but you attend a conservative university with a religious foundation similar to your faith. You assume the addiction recovery center on campus also sees addiction as a moral failing. Will you walk through the doors and ask for help?You’ve experienced religious abuse. You want nothing to do with organized religion, despite your parents’ heavy pressure. Yet, you need help for an addiction to opioids. Do you walk through the doors of the collegiate recovery center at a faith-based university and ask for help?You’ve had no religious upbringing. In your eyes, talking to someone like a minister about your drinking is foreign and uncomfortable. Do you walk through the doors? Like all collegiate recovery professionals, Baylor faces Herculean tasks: Educate a campus full of young people about addiction (These same young people, mind you, were raised with long-held American stereotypes about acceptable drinking in college); ask this campus of adolescents to take an honest look in the mirror when it comes to their own drug and alcohol use; create a safe and encouraging atmosphere for those needing help.Now, let’s make the whole subject even trickier by adding religion to the conversation.Instead of buckling under the pressure, Baylor is establishing a model for other faith-based organizations attempting to bridge the gap between addiction recovery and religion. Lilly Ettinger, BARC’s assistant director of wellness recovery and Stanton Corley, BARC’s recovery support coordinator, offered their professional insights around collegiate recovery and the topic of religion. Pathways to RecoveryThe BARC treads religious waters cautiously by offering students multiple pathways to recovery, including faith-based and secular approaches. Each individual meeting with a student at the BARC ends with a few questions regarding the student’s religious beliefs. If a student discloses a difficult relationship with faith, secular paths to recovery are explored. The questions have a general tone like, “Are you spiritual or religious?”If students have a history of spiritual abuse, empathy is key. “We don’t defend anything that may have happened to them,” says Ettinger, “instead, we’re there to empathize and agree with their past experiences.”This isn’t to say Baylor isn’t first and foremost a faith-based institution but, according to Ettinger, the BARC allows each individual seeking help to set the religious tone.“It is complex and complicated tackling religion and addiction recovery, in many ways,” says Corley. “It may be more complicated at a Christian university navigating multiple pathways to recovery,” he continues. “Many times, we have to be more vocal about our non-religious approaches, rather than our religious approaches,” he adds.Both Corley and Ettinger are seminary trained with theological educations, and both are in recovery. They see their seminary training as an asset, drawing on an ability to build a level of trust with anyone from any background. “We’re trained to empathetically and actively listen,” says Corley. He credits this training, in part, to building trust quickly when a student walks through the BARC’s doors. “We focus on empathetically entering whatever space they are in, with them,” he explains. “This kind of trust allows us to ask hard questions and, sometimes, self-disclosing our own recovery stories. That’s the nature of having a story,” he continues, “we can share our experience, strength, and hope, then say, ‘Hey, this works for me. It may not work for you, but that’s okay, because we have a bunch of alternatives.’”Corley acknowledges some students on campus may have preconceived ideas about addiction. Some students may associate an issue with drugs and alcohol as a moral weakness. “In the right context, I will self-disclose and tell someone my story; how it wasn’t because I was a moral failure,” says Corley. “It was because I had a substance use disorder that led me to go to treatment.”Baylor draws on programs like SMART, Recovery Ally, 12-step programs, and more for training and wellness.Stay on the Same PageBaylor enrolls more than 3,000 students with each freshman class. At each of the roughly 10 freshman orientations each fall, a representative from BARC speaks to parents and new students. No new freshman walks away without an understanding of all the counseling and recovery programs available on campus.In addition, Baylor recovery professionals pay close attention to the language used on campus, drawing mainly on the DSM-V for structure around language and information. The careful language selection is meant to convey a uniformly objective, medical approach to recovery.“Substance use disorders are a common ailment among young adults,” Ettinger explains, “and students who have them shouldn’t be treated any differently than students with any other potential struggle.” Words like “abuse” are discouraged. “No one wants to help an abuser,” she continues. If a student expresses doubts or uncertainty about recovery, students are shown the DSM for clarity around a diagnosis.Because Baylor leads many addiction recovery research programs, the BARC benefits from cross-promotion and cross-information. BARC programs are privy to relevant research and research faculty are offered relevant recovery training.“We’re invited often to speak at faculty trainings,” says Ettinger. “The fair amount of research done across campus is helpful to us,” she continues, “and some research brings a lot of money to the university.” Because Baylor makes research promotion such a priority, the BARC frequently gets acclaim without even knowing it.“My background is church work,” Ettinger explains. “I’m happy to be a part of such a great campus, with great faculty, great research and a great staff. I like to think we have one voice,” she continues. “Addiction research informs our BARC practices and beliefs about recovery, meaning we stay connected with how to best help students.”Changing Outdated Ideas on Both Sides How can collegiate recovery programs at faith-based schools like Baylor lead the way in terms of erasing old stigmas and misinformation around addiction recovery and religion? “We talk about intention vs. impact a lot,” says Ettinger. “There are a lot of really well-intentioned people who want to help people find recovery and wellness.” These same folks, according to Ettinger, may believe recovery is as simple as saying a prayer and showing up at church. “Showing people how recovery looks different for different people is part of what we do,” she adds. Both Ettinger and Corley agree training programs followed by informed discussions for faculty and staff go a long way when it comes to dismantling old stigmas.More than training, however, Corley sees courage on both sides as critical when it comes to knocking down the barriers between the church community and the recovery community.“I find myself telling people how I didn’t use near as many drugs as some of my college classmates,” Corley says. “However, they were able to put it all down, graduate in four years, and have families and careers, but I ended up in treatment twice.” Corley says the response he gets from most folks still surprises him. “More times than not, they’re shocked,” he says. “It doesn’t make sense to them, because whoever uses more drugs is going to have a bigger issue, right?” Corley believes the courage to share experience, strength, and hope will pave the way for change.“It’s going to take humility and courage on both ends,” he says. “Religious organizations need humility to admit wrong-doing and ignorance, plus great courage to commit to do something about it.” Corley doesn’t stop there, he sees a part for the recovery community as well. “People like Lilly and I are churchgoers, and we need to have the courage to stand up and have these same conversations with our church leaders,” he continues. “Because my faith is so important to me, I want to see humility and courage on both sides. I want the recovery community to have the courage to see the importance of religious organizations and institutions and try to understand the hope and good they provide for some people.”As for BARC, Ettinger is proud of their place on the Baylor campus. “I’ve been around since the beginning of the program,” she explains. “I was a Baylor graduate student who helped start one of the first women in recovery meetings on campus in 2015,” she adds.After graduation, Ettinger was hired with the opening of the BARC program in 2017.For more information on the BARC program, visit: https://www.baylor.edu/BARC/

This content was originally published here.

[logothanatos]

The Insufferably Simplistic Scientistic Harris v. The Philosophically Clueless and Politically Confused Peterson

Introductory Evaluation of Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson as People

After my New Atheist days, I pretty much saw Sam Harris as largely, intellectually irrelevant. On the other hand, I have a rather more complicated opinion on Jordan Peterson because he sometimes seems well-meaning but at the same time philosophically and politically naive. That being said, the Zeitgeist seems to be signaling that Peterson has acquired a relevance, even if in a small cadre, and that some people still take Sam Harris seriously (which seems to in turn indicate that mass deconversion is still an ongoing process). I can only imagine Harris still being relevant to budding atheists who still hold on to aspects of conservative thinking and libidinal attachment as well as the Christian rights' historically muddled and confused political categories. Or alternatively to insecure right-wing evangelicals fearful of the recent church exodus of a good number of Americans (whether due to being SBNR or atheists), and thereby politically emboldened into repackaging purely intellectual issues of Christianity into a secular moral quest of maintaining the hegemony or integrity of white identity (white folks as "meritous" representatives of Western civilization and values and tasked with "saving" it). Admittedly that's about the same demographic I could imagine Jordan Peterson appealing to.

Granted that would make sense, as the atheist budding out of theism, especially if having a background in Southern U.S. culture and white, is likely to implicitly run with this politics of identity that incorporates an apocalyptic or "rapture" vision of the clash with Islam as a greater evil than Christianity. In addition they are likely stuck, within their performance of Americanism, in the historical mangle of highly simplified Cold War political categories, just like these evangelicals, leading to politically confused criticisms (it's no wonder many of them get confused when a Facebook meme page that frequently criticizes liberals and has some critical takes on identity politics turns out to be highly left-wing). In fact, there is a temptation amongst some of these atheists, I suspect, to reaffirm the social function of religion as a strategy in this perceived cosmic struggle, hence why some of them side with Peterson and betray the anti-theistic sentiments of the majority of the New Atheist crowd (especially those influenced by Dawkins in particular). It's a Hitchens-esque move.

In sum, both Jordan Peterson and Sam Harris are cheap supermarket preprepared packaged ramen noodles for evangelicals or atheists who just discovered philosophy as politics. As you can tell, these sociological aspects are a lot more interesting than the debate itself--I am not here using them as a counter-argument contra Harris and Peterson (that would be an ad hominem), but it is certainly something to consider given my assessment of them as persons already suggests a larger normative framework that potentially does clash with both Harris' and Peterson's assumptions. In other words, this can function as entry point. In any case, it at least justifies, sociologically, why I'd be wasting any time on these two people, although especially on Sam Harris at this point in my life (at least Peterson is a newcomer into the public intellectual scene).

Onto the Meat and Bones of this Lame Debate

But here's what I think of the (insufferable) debate here, which assesses both Harris and Peterson as debaters as well as philosophers, in addition to both their rhetoric and argument--keep in mind this is an original Youtube comment I made on the video, but all redacted and divided into sections:

Basically this video could've been renamed to "largely unworkable implicit logical positivism / pure correspondence theory of truth v. poorly argued and inconsistent pragmatism from philosophical novice," the former being Harris and the latter being Peterson.

On Peterson's Egregious Failings

A lot of pro-Peterson Youtube commenters seem to agree with Peterson's conclusion and are reconstructing Peterson's argument to sound better than it is. Guess what--even if Peterson's main claim and conclusion were right, it doesn't mean he argued it well. He did not. Sam Harris made some PHIL101 points that made Peterson look out of his element due to Peterson's elementary missteps in building a conceptually precise and consistent argument (whether or not Harris' conclusion is wrong). Peterson instead made a suggestive, appeal to intuition, which is not the same thing (which is fine if this were merely a discussion, and not a debate, and if Peterson had admitted as much). Saying that, given Darwinism, it may be expedient to treat truth in terms of usefulness, and this seems to be what conceptions of truth would be selected for, goes against the very rules of rationality intuited by people which makes Darwinism conceivable as demonstrable--Sam Harris makes this same point. Consequently, while Peterson shows its a suggestive possibility, an obvious flaw is there that Jordan Peterson does not address, instead wasting time on clarifying what he is trying to get at as if the issue were Harris not understanding what he quite literally said rather than his weak argument. To be clear, Peterson does have a problem with clarity or at least transparency of purpose in the rest of the debate, but on this particular point I'd say that was not at issue.

I also think it would've been more helpful if Peterson had just accepted Harris' definitions of truth, but tried to demonstrate how truth and usefulness are nonetheless related in the way he thinks they are as opposed to how Harris thinks they are. (This can be done through internal critique, or simply convincingly pointing out that there is a non-accidental correlation between truth, whatever it might separately or differently mean, and usefulness, whatever it might separately or differently mean.) This would've lead to some clarity or, if not clarity, some nonetheless straight-forward argumentation on Peterson's part. Instead he fumbles around trying to avoid using the word 'truth' inconsistently given he conflated another idea with it that isn't always interchangeable. It's like Peterson can't tell the difference between a definition (that meaning of a term according to its general usage) and a meaning (the many associations and possible directions the term can take) as well as the difference between an abstraction ('truth' emptied of any of the different meanings or uses the term might have, and just in its general potential for use or signification, or 'truth' in all its possible senses) and a concept ('truth' understood through a synthetic, consistent system of relations amongst ideas or propositions). This is why he unproductively, and, in fact, counter-productively resists Harris' initial, basic point. In fact, out of desperation, Peterson shifts the goalpost to showing that truth and the good are the same. This is an age-old position that Peterson could've drawn on for his arguments, but he can't manage to even at least problematize the is/ought dichotomy Harris is drawing. Peterson just reiterates his intuition that there is some special relationship between truth and the good not found between the good and anything else without really defending why the relationships he sees between the good and the true are suggestively special compared to the relationship between the good and other things.

On Harris' Rhetorical Banality and Lack of Nuance as well as the Laughable Accusations Harris, but especially Peterson, throw at Each Other

On the other hand, Harris' responses were uninspired and extremely limited, failing to provide nuance where opportunities were available (not surprising, since Harris sucks at that). His own position is also, while common-sensical, philosophically uninteresting, insufficiently systematic and too scientistic. In addition, Peterson's ignorance is on full display when he accuses Harris of postmodernism--Harris may or may not be wrong, but a lot of what Harris says would be heavily criticized by the archetypal postmodernists if there ever were any (e.g., Lyotard & Baudrillard). 

What is Postmodernism? Neither Sam Harris nor Jordan Peterson Really Seem to Know

One of the major points of the archetypal postmodernists is that the very fragmentation and isolation of identities and disciplines create contradictory normative contexts that constrict rationality in such a way that rational discussion cannot fully penetrate or resolve disagreements. Basically, for a lot of postmodernists, intellectual disagreement are often expressions of social power struggle, desire, etc., that are not rationally resolvable. (Notice that rationality here is just constricted; this means its still conceivable some truths are still objectively decidable, even if largely context-sensitive. The rules of logic still apply.) There are some postmodernists one can argue go the full length into pure relativism (i.e., the position that, not only is nothing or most nothing rationally resolvable and fully accountable, but nothing is rationally decidable), but this is over-all a strawman. One can also argue this particular [aforementioned point] leads to relativism, but that's not the same as to say that postmodernists deliberately endorse relativism. Not to mention that requires more leg work from Peterson, for example, beyond using "postmodern" as a pejorative stand-in for relativism (which he never conclusively demonstrates to be present in the argument being made).

Situating Sam Harris in Relation to Actual Postmodernism

In any case, the point is Sam Harris seems to be committed to an entirely opposite claim than the postmodernists, since he basically puts a lot of stock on conversation, on language, for finding the truth. I feel his inability to take critiques of this position to be his most serious flaw, and it bleeds into his more minor flaws (its his prerogative to try and naturalize morality, but he fumbles in his attempts because of this invulnerable epistemological approach he takes). This is why Harris might seem "close minded" to people--it has nothing to do with his argument itself being somehow unwilling to entertain possibilities. Harris actually entertains possibilities all the time (just witness his unbound use of hypotheticals in the debate!)--the problem is that he is unimaginative when he tries to do it.

Situating Jordan Peterson in Relation to Actual Postmodernism

In addition, its ironic for Peterson to accuse Harris of being postmodernist because the pragmatist epistemologists (e.g., Richard Rorty) were the philosophers most famously and controversially heavily influenced by writers I'd think Peterson would often consider (albeit sometimes incorrectly) postmodernists or proto-postmodernists (e.g., Heidegger [more of a phenomenologist that was a precursor to post-structuralism as well as postmodernism] & Derrida [actually more of a post-structuralist than a postmodernist]). In fact, Nietzsche's Darwinian critique of rationality looks like an early version of aspects of the postmodernist critique of rationality. Yes, Nietzsche was critiquing rationality, not creating a theory of truth. The only thing close to a theory of truth given his critique of rationality was his concept of Will to Power, which is a concept Nietzsche created as an alternative to Darwin's idea of survival instinct/drive. The fact that Peterson endorses Nietzsche but subscribes to conventional Darwinism while applying this to the topic of truth is a sophomoric mistake. Indeed, Peterson is so ignorant that he frequently pairs Marxism with postmodernism as if there aren't disagreements or potentially conflicting implications in the positions and critiques of the two traditions (for example, postmodernism tends to challenge the Marxist notion of historical determinism and the proletariat as universalizing [therefore revolutionary] subject).

Conclusion

Harris is an absolutely terrible philosopher, but Peterson gives the impression of a fucking novice that can't grasp basic distinctions and is mired in the scientific world where data precision and gathering as well as inductive reasoning tends to matter a bit more than argumentative competence and deductive reasoning (scientists distribute this last task into a division of labor, whereas a philosopher is at least supposed to be competent in a holistic way when it comes to argumentation). It is embarrassing Harris sweeps the floor with him when his credentials as a scientist give him an initial advantage in terms of public perception and when Harris himself doesn't hold significant status within the larger philosophical community. It's interesting to point out (and I'm saying this as someone interested in sociology, a socially exemplar soft science for a lot of people), that his area of science isn't even as quantitatively heavy as physics and other sciences. In fact, the replication crises in science seems to be most glaring in psychology. The reason these observations are interesting is that Peterson likes to present himself as having a hard-on for science while making incompetent but confident forays into philosophy, the latter likely for the sake of validating his religious longing. This doesn't put him that far away from Harris' more secular philosophically boring scientism, and also may suggest insecurities about his own field. At the same time, he lampoons and tries to discredit the field closest to his own by psychologizing them in unwarranted ways as a replacement for actually criticizing and engaging sociological methodology. Here I'm psychologizing Jordan Peterson, but only after I've already assessed his debate performance.

The fact that anybody finds either of these two people in the context of this debate worth their while is laughable considering how fucking limited not only the positions presented here are, but how fucking limited either of their arguments for their positions were. The mistakes I pointed out here are the most egregious and most frequent, but there are others such as their oversimplification of the issue of identity politics. I suggest budding atheists and self-doubting evangelicals actually read books, and I mean primary source accounts about a representative array of a tradition or world-view rather than relying on secondary source discussion as if they were unbiased simply because they conform to popular folk notions of things and present and argue against positions within the narrow political spectrum that has prominent mainstream representation. In other words, I hope these sincere Christians leave the bad Biblical hermeneutics and deferral to a messianic figure behind for once for fuck's sake. Their concerns about religion are legitimate, but they'd get much more out of directly, critically reading Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Paul Tillich, etc., as well as the philosophers of modernity (both French and English) without force-fitting them into their monolithic and hegemonic preconceived boxes.

[jansegers]

Simple English Word List

SIMPLE1540 : a simple English wikipedia word list based on the XML export of all articles related to the nine major groups: Everyday life, Geography, History, Knowledge, Language, Literature, People, Religion, and Science and retaining all word forms appearing 7 times or more in this corpus. The total number of words in this corpus is well over the 100.000 words. a A.D. ability able about above absence abstinence abstract academic academy accent accept access accord account across act action active activity actual actually ad add addition adherent adjective adult advance advice affect after again against age agnostic agnosticism ago agree agreement agriculture air alcohol all allow ally almost alone along alphabet also although always amateur amendment among amount an analysis ancient and angel animal annals anonymous another answer anthropomorphism any anyone anything aphasia appear apple apply approach archaeology architecture area argue argument around arrange art article artificial artist ask aspect associate association astronomy at atheism atheist atomic attack attempt attribute audience author authority available average avoid award away B.C. baby back background backpack bad bah balance band baptism base basic basis battle BCE be bear beautiful beauty because become bed bee before begin behavior behind being belief believe believing belong below best better between beyond bias biblical bibliography big billion biological biology birth bit black blind blood blue body book born both bottom boundary box boy brain branch bring brown buffalo build building bull burn business but by c. ca. calendar call can cancer canon capital caption car carbon card carry case cassette cat category cathedral catholic cause cell center central century cerebral certain change chapel chapter character chemical chemistry child china China choice choir choose chronicle church circumcise circumcision cite citizen city civil civilian civilization claim clan class classical cleanup clear clergy click climate close closer clothes clothing coast coauthor code codex cognitive col cold collection college colonization colony color column com come commentary commission common commonly communicate communication communion communist community companion company compare competition complete complex compose composer computer concept conception concern condition confuse confusion congregational connect connection conquer conquest consciousness consider consistent constitution construct construction contain contemporary content context continent continue contrary control convention conversation conversion convert cook cooking copy core correct could council country course court cover covered create creation credit crime critical criticism crop cross crust cultural culture current currently daily damage dark data date day dead death debt decadence decadent decide declaration decline deconstruction deep define definition deity demonstrate denomination department depth describe description design detail determinism developed development device devil diagnosis dialect dictionary die difference different difficult difficulty diphthong dipstick direct directly dirt disagree disambiguation disbelief discipline discover discovery discussion disease disorder distance distinct distinction distinguish distribution divide divine do doctor doctrine document dog don't door down Dr. dream drink drown druid due during dynasty each earlier early earth easier easily easy eat economic economics economy ed edge edit edition editor education effect eight either electric electricity electronic element elevation else emperor empire encyclopedia end energy engine engineering enlightenment enough enter entertainment environment environmental epic episode equal era error especially establish etc. etymology even event eventually ever every everyday everyone everything evidence evil evolution evolve exact exactly example except exchange exist existence expansion experience experiment expert explain explanation express expression external extinct face fact failure fair faith fall false family famous far fast father feature feel feeling female feudal few fiction field fight figure file find finding fire first fish fit five fix flow folk follow food for force foreign foreskin form formal former fortune fought foundation founded four fourth frame framework free freedom frequently friend from front fruit full function functional further future gas general generally generation genre geographer geographic geographical geography geology geometry germ get give glass global go god gold golden good government grammar great greatly green ground group grow growth guide guillotine hair half hall hand handbook handicap handle happen happens happiness happy hard have he head heading health hear heat heaven help hemisphere her here heritage hero high highly him himself his historian historical historiography history hold holy home homo hope hot hour house how however human hundred hunter hypothesis hysteresis I ice icon idea identify identity if illiteracy illiterate illusory image importance important impossible improve in inc. incense include increase indeed independence independent indigenous individual industrial industry influence information inquiry inside instead institute institution instrument instrumentation intellectual intelligence interlinear internal international internet interpretation into introduce introduction invent invention involve iron island issue it IT itself job join journal journalism judge just keep key kill kind king kingdom know knowledge la LA label lack lake lamp land landlocked landscape language large last late later law lead leader leap learn learned least leave legacy legal legend let letter level lexeme library life light lightning like likely limited line linguistic linguistics link liquid list literacy literary literature little liturgy live local location logic logical long longer look lord lore lose lot love low lower mac machine magazine magic magnetic magnum mail main mainly major make male mammal man mankind manuscript many map march March mark market mass material mathematical mathematics matter may May me mean meaning meant measure measurement meat median medical medicine medieval mediterranean medium meet member memory men mental mention mercury message metal method mid middle might migrate migration military millennium million mind minister minute misconception miss model modern modernism modernist moment money monologue monophthong month monument moon moral morality more morning most mostly mother mount mountain mouth move movement much museum music musical musicians must my myth mythology name narrative nation national nationality native natural naturalism naturally nature near nearly necessarily necessary need negative neither neologism network neurogenesis neuron neuroscience never new news newspaper next night nine no non none nor normal normally not note nothing noun novel now nuclear number object objective objectivity observation observe occupation occur ocean octane of off offer office official officially often oil old older on once one online only open opera opposite or oral orbit order org organization organize origin original originally orthography orthology other others our out outer outside over own oxygen p. pack pagan page paint palace paper paradigm parent parish park part participant particular particularly party pas pass past pasta pattern pay peace peer penguin penis people per percent percentage perception performance perhaps period peroxide persecution person personal personality perspective persuasion pet phenomenon philosopher philosophical philosophy phoneme phonetic phonetics photo phrase physic physical picture piece pilgrimage place plan planet plant plat plate play please poem poems poet poetry point pole police policy political politics polytheism polytheistic popular population position positive possession possible possibly post power powerful pp. practical practice praise pray prayer precise predict prediction prehistory present preserve press prevent priest primary principle print printing private probably problem process produce product production professional program project pronounce pronunciation proof property prophet propose prose proselytism protection protein provide province psychological psychology public publication publish publisher publishing punishment pure purpose put pyramid quantum question quickly quite quote race racial rack radiation radio rain range rate rather read reader real realism reality really reason receive recent recently reclamation recognize record recreation red ref refer reference referred reform reformation regard region reign rejection relate relation relationship relatively relativity reliable relic religion religious remain remember remove renaissance replace report republic request require research researcher resource respect response result resurrection retrieve return revelation revert review revision revival revolution rhetoric rich right rise ritual river rock role room royal rule ruled ruler run rural sacred sacrifice safe saga sage saint salad same sample satellite saw say schizophrenia scholar school science scientific scientist scope sea search second secondary section secular see seek seem selection self sense sent sentence separate sequence series service set seven several sexual shall shaman shape share she short should show shrine side sign significant silence similar simple simply since single situation six size skill skin slavery sleep slightly slow small smell smith snake so social society sociology soft soil solar soldier solid soliloquy some someone something sometimes song soon sortable sound source space speak speaker special specie specific speech speed spell spirit spiritual spirituality split sport spread square st. stage stain standard star start state statement station statistic statistical statue status stick still stone stop story strange strap strong structure struggle stub student study stutter style subject successful such sugar suggest sun sung sunlight superior superiority supernatural support suppose supreme sure surface survey surveyor sushi sustainability sustainable sweat symbol symbolic system table take talk tam tan task teach teacher teaching technique technology tectonics teeth tell temperature template temple ten term terminology territory tertiary test testament text textual than thank that the their theism them themselves then theology theoretical theory therapy there therefore thesaurus these they thick thing think third this those though thought thousand three through throughout thumb thus ticket tight time title to today together toilet tolerance toleration tongue too tool top topic total towards tower trade tradition traditional train translation transport travel treat treatment tree trench trial tribe tried trig true truth try turn twentieth twenty two type typical typically ultimate ultraviolet under understand understood union unit united universal universe university unknown unsortable until up upon upper urban urbanization usage use useful usually valley value van vandalism various vassal vegetable verb verbal verse version very video view violence virgin visit vitamin vocabulary voice vol. volume vowel vs. wale wall want war warm warmer wash waste water wave way we weak wealth wear weather web website weight well what when where whether which while white who whole whom whose why wide widely wild wilderness will window wisdom wise witch witchcraft with within without witness woman word work worker world worship would write writer writing wrong yam year yellow you young your

China, March and May made this list because china, march and may are on it and I didn't want to decide in favor of the common noun or the proper noun; all other proper nouns have been omitted (even the ten other months that met the criterium of appearing more then 6 times). #SimpleWikipedia #SimpleEnglish #wordlist #English #words #level1540 #Inli #nimi #selo1540