Dope Tech Episode 2

<<@oswaldrabbit1409 says : Really great stuff! Thanks for keeping doing this!>> <<@Silas_MN says : remarkably prescient, I see this sort of argument all the time>> <<@CSLewisDoodle says : More from C.S. Lewis: "...if all clergymen are intellectual prostitutes who preach for pay - and usually starvation pay - what they secretly believe to be false, surely so widespread a darkening of conscience among thousands of men not otherwise known to be criminal, itself demands explanation? And of course the profession of Christianity is not confined to the clergy. It is professed by millions of women and laymen who earn thereby contempt, unpopularity, suspicion, and the hostility of their own families. How does this come to happen?..." (Myth became Fact).>> <<@roncollinsmm says : Thanks for this !>> <<@Digganob590 says : I always love to see one of these show up in my notifications. This is a great store of education for the future, especially for children.>> <<@legoguydude7069 says : Mr Lewis had a lot of good points and insights, but this might be his best.>> <<@killdozer7530 says : I think, therefore, He Is.>> <<@MatthewTPrice says : I heard this word for the first time literally yesterday. When I saw the title, I thought, wait, is this where I heard that weird word from? Anyway, love your videos, always excited when a new one pops up.>> <<@1roblock says : In the beginning was the Logos>> <<@dsc4178 says : Bulverism, a malady of now as much as then.>> <<@jadonpeters838 says : very interesting>> <<@lifewasgiventous1614 says : It's great to see such a recent upload from ya, I truly love these.>> <<@batTorah says : Thank you for this. Explains how people think today.>> <<@AustinParenti says : Amazingly relevant. Thanks so much for this!>> <<@trashfire9641 says : You must show *that* a man is wrong, before you start to explain *why* he is wrong. I like this line. It pleases me.>> <<@AnnoyingMoose says : In this age of online "arguments" we need Lewis' wisdom more and more!>> <<@sleepinglioness5754 says : This almost sounds like he just wrote it...yesterday.>> <<@sennest says : Wooooohoooo!🎉Another doodle, keep up the beautiful work!🙏😎👍👍🙏>> <<@CSLewisDoodle says : The conclusion of this essay continues below in the form of notes taken down by the Secretary of the Socratic Club: "...Does “I know” involve that God exists? Everything I know is an inference from sensation (except the present moment). All our knowledge of the universe beyond our immediate experiences depends on inferences from these experiences. If our inferences do not give a genuine insight into reality, then we can know nothing. A theory cannot be accepted if it does not allow our thinking to be a genuine insight, nor if the fact of our knowledge is not explicable in terms of that theory. But our thoughts can only be accepted as a genuine insight under certain conditions. All beliefs have causes but a distinction must be drawn between (1) ordinary causes and (2) a special kind of cause called “a reason.” [Ordinary] causes are mindless events which can produce other results than belief. Reasons arise from axioms [self-evident truths] & inferences and affect only beliefs. Bulverism tries to show that the other man has causes and not reasons and that we have reasons and not causes. A belief which can be accounted for entirely in terms of [ordinary] causes is worthless. This principle must not be abandoned when we consider the beliefs which are the basis of others. Our knowledge depends on our certainty about axioms and inferences. If these are the results of causes, then there is no possibility of knowledge. Either we can know nothing or thought has reasons only, and no causes. One might argue that reason had developed by natural selection, only those methods of thought which had proved useful surviving. But the theory depends on an inference from usefulness to truth, of which the validity would have to be assumed. All attempts to treat thought as a natural event involve the fallacy of excluding the thought of the man making the attempt. It is admitted that the mind is affected by physical events; a wireless set is influenced by atmospherics, but it does not originate its deliverances - we’d take no notice of it if we thought it did. Natural events we can relate one to another until we can trace them finally to the space-time continuum. But thought has no father but thought. It is conditioned, yes, not caused. My knowledge that I have nerves in inferential. The same argument applies to our values, which are affected by social factors, but if they are caused by them we cannot know that they are right. One can reject morality as an illusion, but the man who does so often tacitly excepts his own ethical motive: for instance the duty of freeing morality from superstition and of spreading enlightenment. Neither Will nor Reason is the product of Nature. Therefore either I am self-existent (a belief which no one can accept) or I am a colony of some Thought and Will that are self-derived from a self-existent Reason and Goodness outside ourselves, in fact, a Supernatural [Being]. It is often objected that the existence of the Supernatural is too important to be discernible only by abstract argument, and thus only by the leisured few. But in all other ages the plain man has accepted the findings of the mystics and the philosophers for his initial belief in the existence of the Supernatural. Today the ordinary man is forced to carry that burden himself. Either mankind has made a ghastly mistake in rejecting authority, or the power or powers ruling his destiny are making a daring experiment, and all are to become sages. A society consisting solely of plain men must end in disaster. If we are to survive we must either believe the seers or scale those heights ourselves. Evidently, then, something beyond Nature exists. Man is on the border line between the Natural and the Supernatural. Material events cannot produce spiritual activity, but the latter can be responsible for many of our actions in Nature. Will and Reason cannot depend on anything but themselves, but Nature can depend on Will and Reason, or, in other words, God created Nature. The relation between Nature and Supernature, which is not a relation in space and time, becomes intelligible if the Supernatural made the Natural. We even have an idea of this making, since we know the power of imagination, though we can create nothing new, but can only rearrange our material provided through sense data. It is not inconceivable that the universe was created by an Imagination strong enough to impose phenomena on other minds. It has been suggested that our ideas of making and causing are wholly derived from our experience of will. The conclusion usually drawn is that there is no making or causing, only “projection.” But “projection” is itself a form of causing, and it is more reasonable to suppose that Will is the only cause we know, and that therefore Will is the cause of Nature.">>