3 ms·

Have you read Yuval Noah Harari's Sapiens? His central claim is that the -isms are all just like religion, in that one needs faith to believe they exist. Indeed

Have you read Yuval Noah Harari's Sapiens? His central claim is that the -isms are all just like religion, in that one needs faith to believe they exist. Indeed, he postulates that the way humans have come this far in civilization is by collectively believing in complex ideas.

BeetleB 8y ago
>Have you read Yuval Noah Harari's Sapiens? I have not, but a friend did recommend it to me earlier this year. >His central claim is that the -isms are all just like religion, in that one needs faith to believe they exist. I looked at my comment after reading yours, and realized almost everything I listed is an "ism". That wasn't intentional, but I guess it's also not surprising. Somewhat on a tangent: In the last so many years, in various conversations, if I'm asked what I think of <insert random -ism>, I tend to respond "I don't believe in it." Or more nuanced "It has some interesting points". The problems I've had with -isms is that people are initially attracted to a particular -ism because something in it rings true for them. But then over time they start pushing things simply because they are part of that -ism - without critical thinking. I'd rather not be pushed into accepting it wholesale. They'll defer a little too much to leaders in that particular movement. Invariably, they'll unnecessarily believe something that is espoused by that ideology but may be in conflict with the world. Along the same lines, I'm a bit wary of making any ideology part of my identity. As an example, many of my beliefs may coincide with what in the US is called liberalism, but I will never view myself as a liberal. It's totally fine to be liberal in some ways and not in others. I have my own identity, and it is influenced by many ideologies - but I don't want to add things to my identity just because I am partial to that ideology. And I definitely don't care if someone points out that some particular view I hold is not consistent with liberalism. If you've read the book Influence by Cialdini, this is essentially guarding against the consistency principle.

BeetleB 8y ago

>Have you read Yuval Noah Harari's Sapiens? I have not, but a friend did recommend it to me earlier this year. >His central claim is that the -isms are all just like religion, in that one needs faith to believe they exist. I looked at my comment after reading yours, and realized almost everything I listed is an "ism". That wasn't intentional, but I guess it's also not surprising. Somewhat on a tangent: In the last so many years, in various conversations, if I'm asked what I think of <insert random -ism>, I tend to respond "I don't believe in it." Or more nuanced "It has some interesting points". The problems I've had with -isms is that people are initially attracted to a particular -ism because something in it rings true for them. But then over time they start pushing things simply because they are part of that -ism - without critical thinking. I'd rather not be pushed into accepting it wholesale. They'll defer a little too much to leaders in that particular movement. Invariably, they'll unnecessarily believe something that is espoused by that ideology but may be in conflict with the world. Along the same lines, I'm a bit wary of making any ideology part of my identity. As an example, many of my beliefs may coincide with what in the US is called liberalism, but I will never view myself as a liberal. It's totally fine to be liberal in some ways and not in others. I have my own identity, and it is influenced by many ideologies - but I don't want to add things to my identity just because I am partial to that ideology. And I definitely don't care if someone points out that some particular view I hold is not consistent with liberalism. If you've read the book Influence by Cialdini, this is essentially guarding against the consistency principle.