The Irrational Age

 

Every age needs a title.  In the current age, men can be women and women, men; CO2, a most essential compound (it fuels photosynthesis) at o.o412% of our atmosphere (it has, in fact, historically been much higher according to the fossil record) is said to be killing the planet; police are bad and criminals, victims; no share of the tax burden is fair enough for the rich; we trade expensive, unreliable, problematic, inefficient sources of energy (that are made of highly toxic, very rare and expensive materials that are difficult and energy-intensive to mine, process, manufacture and dispose of) for relatively cheap and abundant fossil fuels; sex is no longer private and perversions must be celebrated publicly; language is twisted and redefined to accommodate and color politics; government sponsors and funds the creation of Frankenstein viruses and then covers it up; experimental genetic therapies are forced upon the public in a magical assumption of efficacy (which proves completely false), etc.

This is our time, where reason and knowledge have been supplanted by technology; where education is sacrificed for conversion and obeisance; where even God can presumably accept infanticide and self-murder; where violent protest and destruction are protected political speech; where history can be torn down and irradicated from existence and where theft, violent crime, intoxication, indolence, and vagrantism are lifestyle choices subsidized by the government.

The rational, careful, modern technology age is in the past.  History is irrelevant.  Science is dead.  Words are violence. The only things that are relevant are a lived, emotional experience and screen time.

Welcome to the Irrational Age.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 23 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Kozak Member
    Kozak
    @Kozak

    Doug Kimball

    Every age needs a title.  In the current age, men can be women and women, men; CO2, a most essential compound (it fuels photosynthesis) at o.oo412% of our atmosphere (it has in fact historically been much higher according to the fossil record) is said to be killing the planet;

    During the Cambrian Era, known for the explosion of life around the planet, CO2 levels were 1700% of current levels.  And there was no run away green house effect.

    • #1
  2. DonG (CAGW is a Scam) Coolidge
    DonG (CAGW is a Scam)
    @DonG

    I like “Irrational” better than “post-modern”.

    • #2
  3. Misthiocracy has never Member
    Misthiocracy has never
    @Misthiocracy

    This age is not irrational.

    Pretty much by definition, one cannot intend to be irrational. Intent requires choice, and choice is a necessary component for the literal meaning of the word “rational” (i.e. to make a ratio, to choose a course of action after weighing one’s options, etc.).

    Irrationality comes before rationality. It is in fact the default state for living organisms (i.e. to react to stimuli according to instinct, the proverbial “lizard brain”, etc.).

    That’s not what’s going on with humanity today.

    What is going on with humanity today is an intentional attack on rationality itself.

    Thus, the more correct label would in fact be antirationality.

    • #3
  4. Steven Galanis Coolidge
    Steven Galanis
    @Steven Galanis

    Misthiocracy has never (View Comment):

    This age is not irrational.

    Pretty much by definition, one cannot intend to be irrational. Intent requires choice, and choice is a necessary component for the literal meaning of the word “rational” (i.e. to make a ratio, to choose a course of action after weighing one’s options, etc.).

    Irrationality comes before rationality. It is in fact the default state for living organisms (i.e. to react to stimuli according to instinct, the proverbial “lizard brain”, etc.).

    That’s not what’s going on with humanity today.

    What is going on with humanity today is an intentional attack on rationality itself.

    Thus, the more correct label would in fact be antirationality.

    Since time immemorial, our planet has been teeming with lizard brains. Now  imagine a condition in which the offspring of entire societies linger a bit longer in the adolescent phase of development as well as a sharp ascent in the numbers of those stuck there like ice age frost.  Tough to say if the Age of Reason is behind us, but if it is, what’s left?

     

     

     

    • #4
  5. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Misthiocracy has never (View Comment):

    This age is not irrational.

    Pretty much by definition, one cannot intend to be irrational. Intent requires choice, and choice is a necessary component for the literal meaning of the word “rational” (i.e. to make a ratio, to choose a course of action after weighing one’s options, etc.).

    Irrationality comes before rationality. It is in fact the default state for living organisms (i.e. to react to stimuli according to instinct, the proverbial “lizard brain”, etc.).

    That’s not what’s going on with humanity today.

    What is going on with humanity today is an intentional attack on rationality itself.

    Thus, the more correct label would in fact be antirationality.

    Vandalism is completely irrational.  Some may try to excuse vandalism and “burn it all down” as rational, but their arguments are not rational.

    And yes, destroying rationality is anti-rational.

    My pet way of thinking is that all rationality and rational acts are an effort to overcome entropy — and to further survival and growth.  To encourage psychological, material and civilizational entropy is to ultimately threaten survival of the species.  And this falls under that heading of Evil.

    • #5
  6. GlenEisenhardt Coolidge
    GlenEisenhardt
    @GlenEisenhardt

    The people who said secularism would lead to more reason have been proven totally wrong. The objective truth of science would win out over superstition they said. Now we have PhD level scientists and doctors who believe in sex changes the same way cults believe in lead turning into gold. They believe pregnancy can happen without a womb. Next theyll be tellng us crops can be grown with no seeds. Secularism has been a disaster. 

    • #6
  7. Victor Tango Kilo Member
    Victor Tango Kilo
    @VtheK

    I call it the Age of Idiotarianism, but that’s not quite right, is it. It’s more of a reverse Enlightenment; an age where science is increasingly rejected (“Men can get pregnant!”) Governments are becoming more authoritarian, and people are becoming savage and cruel. 

    What would you call these times when society turns away from the light and toward the darkness? The Rise of Shadows? The Dimming? The Endarkenment?

    The Stupid Times works good. 

    • #7
  8. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Where does this irrationality come from?  What is the cause of all this?  I rarely watch videos that over an hour long, but I did watch the long form (1hr, 16min) exchange between Bret Weinstein and Peter Boghassian with interest and a bit of sadness, the short version of which was a post by Franco, Can’t Argue with This.

    It starts with Bret saying that if you really know something, you should be able to make accurate predictions which prove you’re actually right.  Next Bret makes a statement that he fears Wokism is potentially an existential threat to humanity.  They end up with asking why “… the West is deliberately, it would seem, tearing apart every functional structure and replacing it with a fairy tale… It’s bull sh*t.”

    No, it’s Evil.

    Weinstein asserts (probably correctly) that Wokism is a religion.  I may have forgotten a lot, but I don’t remember anyone ever asserting, even in Comparative Religion classes, any actual “religion” that doesn’t dogmatically incorporate a belief in the supernatural — God, or gods, or a godhead, or an immaterial Spirit, or spirits.

    And yet these two atheistically lay the blame on, and “wonder” with perplexity if “our antagonists in the world, our competitors” our “enemies” (including Russia and Saudi Arabia, and possibly China) are not seeding Wokism into the Western culture in order to destroy it.  It’s a religion, yet they deny the supernatural.

    As for predictions proving that you’re right, sure.  But God made two key predictions, the first one has come true; and the second one is staring them in their faces, but they refuse to see it as the fulfillment of the prediction made 2,000 years ago.  And yet, Bret and Peter see this religion as a secular phenomenon, devoid of supernatural elements.

    They don’t see the capital-E Evil.

    But there is a religion in which God has made His predictions.  First, the Bible’s 69 weeks (or “sevens”, that is seven year periods) of Daniel’s 70-week prophecy came true, which specified the date of the Messiah’s coming, which coincides with the years of Jesus’ time on earth (some say accurate to the day of His ride into Jerusalem being hailed as the King of the Jews).

    And the second, in the Book of the Revelation God predicted that one day there would simultaneously be a One World Government (the WEF, Davos,  and Global Corporatists), a One World Economic System (the Basel set, the BIS [Bank of International Settlements], etc.) which would be able to cancel disobedient individuals anywhere in the world from purchasing things (as with a digital currency) and a One World Religion, an evil global religion.

    They are literally saying that if you’re right you should be able to prove it by making accurate predictions, and there’s a one-world religion capable of destroying humanity.  And they can’t put two and two together.

    • #8
  9. Doug Kimball Thatcher
    Doug Kimball
    @DougKimball

    Irrationalism is a part of tribalism, where beliefs define ones inclusion; depth of belief represents ones commitment to the collective and defiance of belief shows apostatism.  The collective provides protection, comfort and succor, but for the presumed apostate, it provides re-education, contempt, isolation and ostracization, even torture and death.  Those who control the tribe may propose the most irrational of beliefs (the sacrifice of virgins is popular in history, or of first born sons) and yet, there is no revolt.  Such is the hold of tribalism.  It is not rational.  The rational defies the entire tribal structure.  The only things that are certain in irrational tribalism are intimidation and fear.

    • #9
  10. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot) Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot)
    @ArizonaPatriot

    I don’t think that you are describing irrationality.  You are describing alternative values in most instances (and disagreements about facts in a couple instances).

    Their values are not based on reason, but neither are yours, Doug.  Neither are mine.

    • #10
  11. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot) Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot)
    @ArizonaPatriot

    Doug Kimball: CO2, a most essential compound (it fuels photosynthesis) at o.oo412% of our atmosphere (it has, in fact, historically been much higher according to the fossil record) is said to be killing the planet

    I think that your math is in error here.  I infer that you’re trying to express a CO2 level of 412 parts per million (the latest figure seems to be 414, but whatever).

    1,000 parts per million would be 0.1%.  412 parts per million would be 0.0412% — not 0.00412%.

    • #11
  12. Doug Kimball Thatcher
    Doug Kimball
    @DougKimball

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    I don’t think that you are describing irrationality. You are describing alternative values in most instances (and disagreements about facts in a couple instances).

    Their values are not based on reason, but neither are yours, Doug. Neither are mine.

    Nope.  It is irrational to destroy ones child.  It is irrational to believe that your sex organs can be swapped with another.  It is irrational to assume that a shrinking police force will not lead to an increase in lawlessness.  It is irrational to believe that so-called carbon free energy is actually carbon free, is remotely achievable and comes with no perverse environmental damage.  It is irrational to tell a five year old that he can choose his gender.  It is irrational to assume that everyone should remember your made up pronouns, and when they don’t, call them names and shun them.  It is irrational to take your own life.  

    These are not beliefs, but truths, impirically provable and based upon reason.

    • #12
  13. Doug Kimball Thatcher
    Doug Kimball
    @DougKimball

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    Doug Kimball: CO2, a most essential compound (it fuels photosynthesis) at o.oo412% of our atmosphere (it has, in fact, historically been much higher according to the fossil record) is said to be killing the planet

    I think that your math is in error here. I infer that you’re trying to express a CO2 level of 412 parts per million (the latest figure seems to be 414, but whatever).

    1,000 parts per million would be 0.1%. 412 parts per million would be 0.0412% — not 0.00412%.

    Too many zeros in any case (and old eyes – I did the math.)  It is still less than .05 100ths of a percent.  I remain a disbeliever in CO2 as a driver of cataclysmic climate change.  Where’s the evidence?  The Great Barrier Reef is expanding.  The North Pole Ice pack is larger than it was in 1989 when Gore made his predictions.  Oceanic levels continue to rise infinitesimally as they have over the past few hundred years.  Here in AZ we had a wet summer with relatively low temps (we’re back up though in the past couple of days.)  The Mississippi is threatening its banks.  The east has been hot and dry as has been Europe.  That has happened a few times in my lifetime, with the “no sprinkling” mandates.  It’s weather.  It changes.

    As the Dems say, never let a crisis go to waste.  It’s good to know that Climate Change and COVID are not the only recent existential threats around.  MAGA members are now on the threat team.

    • #13
  14. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot) Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot)
    @ArizonaPatriot

    Doug Kimball (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    I don’t think that you are describing irrationality. You are describing alternative values in most instances (and disagreements about facts in a couple instances).

    Their values are not based on reason, but neither are yours, Doug. Neither are mine.

    Nope. It is irrational to destroy ones child. It is irrational to believe that your sex organs can be swapped with another. It is irrational to assume that a shrinking police force will not lead to an increase in lawlessness. It is irrational to believe that so-called carbon free energy is actually carbon free, is remotely achievable and comes with no perverse environmental damage. It is irrational to tell a five year old that he can choose his gender. It is irrational to assume that everyone should remember your made up pronouns, and when they don’t, call them names and shun them. It is irrational to take your own life.

    These are not beliefs, but truths, impirically provable and based upon reason.

    I don’t think that you are correct about this, at all.  All of this depends upon your assumptions about values.  I think that it is very important that you understand this.

    Take the police.  If we were facing the East German Stasi, shrinking the police force might be a good idea, don’t you think?

    You are moving the bar with your discussion about “carbon free” energy.  I think that it is a fact that some sources of energy release more carbon dioxide, and some release less.  Do you disagree?

    It’s not even irrational to take your own life, if you have a different set of values.  It may depend on the circumstances, though this, too, may depend on your values.  

    I think that you and I are in broad agreement about your conclusions.  I think that your reasoning is faulty, and that you are not recognizing that, if you are reaching your opinions by logical reasoning at all, that reasoning is based on a set of axioms and decision rules that are not, themselves, provable by reason.

    I think that the worst consequence of your erroneous argument is that it leads you to an incorrect conclusion about the cause of the current disagreements.  You think that the problem is intellectual.  I think that the problem is spiritual.

    • #14
  15. Doug Kimball Thatcher
    Doug Kimball
    @DougKimball

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    Doug Kimball (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    I don’t think that you are describing irrationality. You are describing alternative values in most instances (and disagreements about facts in a couple instances).

    Their values are not based on reason, but neither are yours, Doug. Neither are mine.

    Nope. It is irrational to destroy ones child. It is irrational to believe that your sex organs can be swapped with another. It is irrational to assume that a shrinking police force will not lead to an increase in lawlessness. It is irrational to believe that so-called carbon free energy is actually carbon free, is remotely achievable and comes with no perverse environmental damage. It is irrational to tell a five year old that he can choose his gender. It is irrational to assume that everyone should remember your made up pronouns, and when they don’t, call them names and shun them. It is irrational to take your own life.

    These are not beliefs, but truths, impirically provable and based upon reason.

    I don’t think that you are correct about this, at all. All of this depends upon your assumptions about values. I think that it is very important that you understand this.

    Take the police. If we were facing the East German Stasi, shrinking the police force might be a good idea, don’t you think?

    You are moving the bar with your discussion about “carbon free” energy. I think that it is a fact that some sources of energy release more carbon dioxide, and some release less. Do you disagree?

    It’s not even irrational to take your own life, if you have a different set of values. It may depend on the circumstances, though this, too, may depend on your values.

    I think that you and I are in broad agreement about your conclusions. I think that your reasoning is faulty, and that you are not recognizing that, if you are reaching your opinions by logical reasoning at all, that reasoning is based on a set of axioms and decision rules that are not, themselves, provable by reason.

    I think that the worst consequence of your erroneous argument is that it leads you to an incorrect conclusion about the cause of the current disagreements. You think that the problem is intellectual. I think that the problem is spiritual.

    I’m applying rationale to the specifics of this age, to what is being touted on the left in the USA today.  It has nothing to with values, other than the belief that life has value, that survival has value.  Nothing shocking here.  Folks who believe otherwise may be trying to justify their irrationality with some kind of alternative universe of values, but that is just another example of their irrationality.  There is no alternative universe.  They are irrational.

    • #15
  16. iWe Coolidge
    iWe
    @iWe

    I am shocked to discover that I agree entirely with a comment by Jerry.

    • #16
  17. Doug Kimball Thatcher
    Doug Kimball
    @DougKimball

    iWe (View Comment):

    I am shocked to discover that I agree entirely with a comment by Jerry.

    Just the last line, of course.  The rest, however, is a stretch.

    • #17
  18. Basil Fawlty Member
    Basil Fawlty
    @BasilFawlty

    Misthiocracy has never (View Comment):
    Thus, the more correct label would in fact be antirationality.

    Not anterationality?

    • #18
  19. Retail Lawyer Member
    Retail Lawyer
    @RetailLawyer

    Jerry is philosophically correct, but Doug has the more practical analysis.  The assumptions Doug makes are foreseeable, while the assumptions of the woke are ridiculous and a poor basis for public policy or rationality.  China, India, Indonesia will not wake up and see the error of their carbon ways and adopt German carbon policies out of guilt, benevolence, shame, or whatever.   Even if they believe Greta, they will free-ride.  California is assuming the electricity will arrive and the raw materials for electric cars will just be there in 13 years.  These assumptions, and countless others are ridiculous.

    So, how about “The  Ridiculous Age”?  The photos in the post illustrate it.

    • #19
  20. RushBabe49 Thatcher
    RushBabe49
    @RushBabe49

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Misthiocracy has never (View Comment):

    This age is not irrational.

    Pretty much by definition, one cannot intend to be irrational. Intent requires choice, and choice is a necessary component for the literal meaning of the word “rational” (i.e. to make a ratio, to choose a course of action after weighing one’s options, etc.).

    Irrationality comes before rationality. It is in fact the default state for living organisms (i.e. to react to stimuli according to instinct, the proverbial “lizard brain”, etc.).

    That’s not what’s going on with humanity today.

    What is going on with humanity today is an intentional attack on rationality itself.

    Thus, the more correct label would in fact be antirationality.

    Vandalism is completely irrational. Some may try to excuse vandalism and “burn it all down” as rational, but their arguments are not rational.

    And yes, destroying rationality is anti-rational.

    My pet way of thinking is that all rationality and rational acts are an effort to overcome entropy — and to further survival and growth. To encourage psychological, material and civilizational entropy is to ultimately threaten survival of the species. And this falls under that heading of Evil.

    Vandalism is perfectly rational to the vandals.  The intent is to have an effect on society, “make your mark”, change things, and it works for the vandals.  They definitely make their mark, and convey a message.

    • #20
  21. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    RushBabe49 (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Misthiocracy has never (View Comment):

    This age is not irrational.

    Pretty much by definition, one cannot intend to be irrational. Intent requires choice, and choice is a necessary component for the literal meaning of the word “rational” (i.e. to make a ratio, to choose a course of action after weighing one’s options, etc.).

    Irrationality comes before rationality. It is in fact the default state for living organisms (i.e. to react to stimuli according to instinct, the proverbial “lizard brain”, etc.).

    That’s not what’s going on with humanity today.

    What is going on with humanity today is an intentional attack on rationality itself.

    Thus, the more correct label would in fact be antirationality.

    Vandalism is completely irrational. Some may try to excuse vandalism and “burn it all down” as rational, but their arguments are not rational.

    And yes, destroying rationality is anti-rational.

    My pet way of thinking is that all rationality and rational acts are an effort to overcome entropy — and to further survival and growth. To encourage psychological, material and civilizational entropy is to ultimately threaten survival of the species. And this falls under that heading of Evil.

    Vandalism is perfectly rational to the vandals. The intent is to have an effect on society, “make your mark”, change things, and it works for the vandals. They definitely make their mark, and convey a message.

    But to what effect?  To sow fear.  To show their destructive power.  To be the center of attention.  To destroy for destruction’s sake.  These are all primitive emotional desires, the changing of society is just the excuse.

    • #21
  22. J Climacus Member
    J Climacus
    @JClimacus

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    I don’t think that you are describing irrationality. You are describing alternative values in most instances (and disagreements about facts in a couple instances).

    Their values are not based on reason, but neither are yours, Doug. Neither are mine.

    “Values” is one of those modern words invented to enforce dogma that is not self-evident.  Classical philosophers talked about good and evil, not “values.”  They did so quite reasonably. Then Hume came along and proclaimed that we can’t derive an “ought” from an “is”,  so now we only have arbitrary “values”, and we can’t say that a twelve year old ought not have her breasts chopped off because she is a girl. If this doesn’t make people reconsider the Enlightenment project at its roots, nothing ever will. 

    • #22
  23. DonG (CAGW is a Scam) Coolidge
    DonG (CAGW is a Scam)
    @DonG

    Doug Kimball (View Comment):
    disbeliever in CO2 as a driver of cataclysmic climate change.

    Good for you, CAGW (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming) is a scam.   They told us it would be hot and there would be disasters everywhere and that it was *certain*.   Since 1962, just two times have we gone through August without a named storm in the Atlantic.  In about an hour it will be three times. 

    • #23
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.