3 Whisky Happy HourThe Ricochet PodcastGLoP CultureBeyond the Polls with Henry OlsenParsing Immigration PolicyFederalist Radio HourWhat the Hell Is Going OnFreedom to LearnDaily SignalThe Erick Erickson ShowChicks on The Right3 Martini LunchThe Learning CurveThe Conservative Woman’s GuideHeritage ExplainsNot Dead YetGiving VenturesWho Funds that?The Radio Free Hillsdale HourThe Glenn ShowFirst Things PodcastCall Me Back - with Dan SenorHillsdale DialoguesLaw Talk with Epstein, Yoo & CookeThe LibertarianThe Report Card with Nat MalkusThe Kevin Roberts Show with Larry O’ConnorThe American IdeaMadison’s NotesConservative Crossroads with Henry OlsenMom WarsThe Back of the BookGray MattersMartini ShotThe Dave Carter ShowThe Powerline ShowIn DissentHeard at HeritageSmart Girl PoliticsJames Lileks’ The DinerCase in Point: The Legal Show on the Hottest Legal Cases in Politics and CultureJobMakersOne on One with Robert DoarHomeschooling Journeys with Curious MikeHubwonk

Get the Ricochet app

Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.

Download on the App StoreGet it on Google Play

Become a member.

Tired of the toxicity of social media? Why not join Ricochet for just $5/month? Think of it as an online bar. Come in, have a drink, hang out, say whatever you want. But don’t badger, bully, or berate the other drinkers. That's our only rule.

  1. Main Feed/
  2. What is your Good Place?
December 7, 2025 at 12:15 PM

What is your Good Place?

Henry Castaigne
@HenryCastaigne

To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

Join to bookmark16likesJoin to like43comments

A Muslim apologist recently said that he would prefer to live in a society that had low-IQ citizens who were religious rather than a high-IQ society. (Link here — NSFW.) You are probably too busy to watch the whole debate, but I have, and that isn’t a mischaracterization.

A far more intelligent Catholic commentator stated that his ideal world would have tons of technology, everyone would be Christians, and some high-IQ people would use the power of technology for beneficent ends. Doesn’t sound like a bad world to me.*

The debate is fascinating because it doesn’t weigh itself down with specifics. It’s like science fiction without the tedium. What kind of world would be good if you could alter its parameters?

Personally, I want to live in a world where everyone agrees on logic, empirical truth, and evolution in that order. Christianity and most other religions would be practiced and debated, but they would pursue Truth through scientific thought. Catholicism would fully reject monogenism,* Native-Americans would abandon the belief that they originated from the American soil. Miracles and demonic possessions would be met with skepticism and rigorous inquiries.

Begone, demon of ignorance. I am the Aristotle exorcist.

The ultimate value would be the pursuit of Truth through a mix of reason and empiricism. In order to pursue the highest good, eventually I would like to use genetic engineering to increase people’s IQ to at least 105 and enable them to mentally connect to AI to advance their understanding of the natural world. Some would view this as violating G-d’s will or defying the natural order, but I view the ultimate good as being the pursuit of knowledge so I’m welcoming of human modification.

As Jordan Peterson has noted, everyone has something they value more than anything else, something that they will be willing to sacrifice other things for. Environmentalists want to sacrifice human prosperity for the environment, while socialists would be fine sacrificing economic growth for equality. Starving artists sacrifice a steady income to pursue their craft, and so on. Much of life is a balance between different good things, but often one particular good becomes primary.

What is your highest good, and what world would you create to pursue that good?

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

*I do think that if everyone were Catholic, technology would advance as quickly as it would in a Protestant society.

**Many Catholics are rejecting monogenism already.

This post was promoted to the Main Feed at the recommendation of Ricochet's members.

Discussion (43)

Sign in to commentSign in
  • MODERATOR

    To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    E. Kent Golding@EKentGolding·45w

    Interesting post. I had assumed you were not religious or a believer.

  • To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    J Climacus@JClimacus·45w

    The ultimate value would be the pursuit of Truth through a mix of reason and empiricism. In order to pursue the highest good, eventually I would like to use genetic engineering to increase people’s I.Q. to at least 105 and allow people to mentally connect to AI to advance their understanding of the natural world. Some would view this as violating the G-d’s will or defying the natural order but I view the ultimate good as being the pursuit of knowledge so I’m welcoming of human modification.

    It's fascinating that when considering the engineering of the human race, it's almost always intelligence that is brought forward as the most important thing to engineer.

    Not virtue.

    Intelligence is just a capability, like strength or vision, and in itself is morally neutral. It can be used for good or evil. An intelligent man who is not virtuous will simply be more capable than he otherwise would be of pursuing evil ends. Stalin, Mao, and Mengele were intelligent men. If we knew of a way to engineer people to be more courageous, temperate, just and prudent (the four classical "cardinal virtues"), then human engineering might possibly be something worth talking about.

    But we don't, and the fact that intelligence rather than virtue is proposed as the focus of human engineering just shows how dangerous the idea is, and how likely the result would be something far different than intended. It would take a supremely wise and just authority to supervise such engineering to avoid catastrophic evil as a result, and no such authority is on hand. This is why God advises us to leave such things to Him.

  • To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    Henry Castaigne@HenryCastaigne·45w
    ReplyingtoE. Kent Golding

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    Interesting post. I had assumed you were not religious or a believer.

    Almost everyone is religious. Everyone has something that the prize above all else. For me Truth is G-d. Not Yeshua or the Jewish conception of G-d or the Gautama Buddha. Science is holier than typical religion (literally in my religious view) because it is a more accurate way of deducing Truth. Also, it's a religious obligation to defend

    I also believe in a soul and human rights (Lockean negative rights obviously) but that is an entirely separate part of my belief system.

    I believe that G-d is an uncaring Lovecraftian entity but that is largely based on very human and therefore very flawed observations about the universe.

  • MODERATOR

    To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    E. Kent Golding@EKentGolding·45w
    ReplyingtoHenry Castaigne

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    Interesting post. I had assumed you were not religious or a believer.

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Almost everyone is religious. Everyone has something that the prize above all else. For me Truth is G-d. Not Yeshua or the Jewish conception of G-d or the Gautama Buddha. Science is holier than typical religion (literally in my religious view) because it is a more accurate way of deducing Truth. Also, it’s a religious obligation to defend

    I also believe in a soul and human rights (Lockean negative rights obviously) but that is an entirely separate part of my belief system.

    I believe that G-d is an uncaring Lovecraftian entity but that is largely based on very human and therefore very flawed observations about the universe.

    Thanks. I stand corrected.

  • To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    TBA@RobtGilsdorf·45w
    ReplyingtoE. Kent Golding

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    Interesting post. I had assumed you were not religious or a believer.

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Almost everyone is religious. Everyone has something that the prize above all else. For me Truth is G-d. Not Yeshua or the Jewish conception of G-d or the Gautama Buddha. Science is holier than typical religion (literally in my religious view) because it is a more accurate way of deducing Truth. Also, it’s a religious obligation to defend

    I also believe in a soul and human rights (Lockean negative rights obviously) but that is an entirely separate part of my belief system.

    I believe that G-d is an uncaring Lovecraftian entity but that is largely based on very human and therefore very flawed observations about the universe.

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    Thanks. I stand corrected.

    Well, we can’t all wgah’nagl the fthagn.

Scroll for later comments
+38 more comments
Join the conversation

You're seeing five of 43 comments. Sign in, or join for just $5 per month, to read them all and add your own.

Trending

Become a member.

Tired of the toxicity of social media? Why not join Ricochet for just $5/month? Think of it as an online bar. Come in, have a drink, hang out, say whatever you want. But don’t badger, bully, or berate the other drinkers. That's our only rule.

Join Ricochet

Get the Ricochet app

Download on the App StoreGet it on Google Play
  • •
  • •