4 ms·

Is it cynicism or realism? To quote Everything2, [my] "... radical ideas about religion as a mechanism of social control have already occurred to others." It'

Is it cynicism or realism? To quote Everything2, [my] "... radical ideas about religion as a mechanism of social control have already occurred to others." It's quite difficult to separate some system of sinner and saint, sanctity and atrocity, from what might be of utility to have some portion of the populace to believe. Our parents lied to us about many things because it was convenient that we believe them, from Santa to that dog who went to live on a farm. Obey the food pyramid (which version?) Oil companies and pharmaceutical developers say "Trust the science!" even as they pay for the studies. And certainly there's a sense of ease in swallowing what is put in front of you, without question. How untroubling! I needn't worry my pretty head about what I am told. To paraphrase: An end to struggle, at last I believed my Big Brother. So no, a much closer enemy to virtue is those who would make cynicism a viable position. Look to those if you're in search of a dagger heading for a spine. If cynicism weren't of utility, only the most perverse would adopt it. Paul Gerhardt said it, "When a man lies, he murders some part of the world." But I can hardly go through life pretending that liars do not exist and that there are whole industries, such as advertising, predicated on getting me to believe something which isn't quite true. Perhaps in a better world, things would be different, but first find one where the liars are not making ruin of truth.

robertlagrant 3y ago
> If cynicism weren't of utility, only the most perverse would adopt it. Cynicism and its mirror, naivete, aren't always wrong. It's just cynicism is prone to false positives of things to avoid, and naivete to false negatives of same.
zoogeny 3y ago
> Is it cynicism or realism? It depends on what you are referring to when you say "it". Your insinuation that Lewis was misleading people by claiming to support avoiding chasing after some inner-ring so that he and others like him could benefit is pretty much a description of cynicism. It does not follow any definition of "realism" that I would support. You might argue that some people sometimes misrepresent their opinions and provide advice that goes against the interests of others for their own advantage. You might suggest that is "realism", but again it wouldn't match my own definition of that term even if I were to agree it is an accurate observation about our shared experience. It does not imply to me that everyone is always misrepresenting their opinions and always providing advice that goes against the interests of others for their own advantage. It also doesn't imply that Lewis was doing so in this essay. As in my silly example, a fool may really and truly believe that a reduction in cheating would be of a general benefit. Cynicism is to assume the fool was misrepresenting their opinion in order to gain some advantage of you. It is making a mistake to apply a general observation that happens in some cases to a specific instance where it may not apply. You might say "I'd rather make the assumption and be wrong and thereby avoid even the chance of being cheated", which is why I argue that cynicism is the enemy of virtue. An inability to trust in others makes it very hard indeed to act with virtue.
- at_a_remove 3y ago
  I will admit I have been mistrustful of Lewis since I was a small child. The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe was my first in memory experience of feeling like the author had attempted to put one over on me, with this Aslan business. I wanted to read a fantasy book, not a lecture in a RenFaire outfit. Indeed, much later I would read from Lewis that Aslan is not an allegory for Christ but something else. That kind of hair-splitting seemed like so much sophistry, but remember, it was for my supposed benefit. Ever since, I haven't been able to read Lewis without a feeling of what he thinks it would be better for me to believe, even when I went into The Screwtape Letters with anticipation. But I feel the sin resides with the one who does the misrepresentation, not the one who recognizes it exists and acts reasonably once it is identified.

robertlagrant 3y ago

> If cynicism weren't of utility, only the most perverse would adopt it. Cynicism and its mirror, naivete, aren't always wrong. It's just cynicism is prone to false positives of things to avoid, and naivete to false negatives of same.

zoogeny 3y ago

> Is it cynicism or realism? It depends on what you are referring to when you say "it". Your insinuation that Lewis was misleading people by claiming to support avoiding chasing after some inner-ring so that he and others like him could benefit is pretty much a description of cynicism. It does not follow any definition of "realism" that I would support. You might argue that some people sometimes misrepresent their opinions and provide advice that goes against the interests of others for their own advantage. You might suggest that is "realism", but again it wouldn't match my own definition of that term even if I were to agree it is an accurate observation about our shared experience. It does not imply to me that everyone is always misrepresenting their opinions and always providing advice that goes against the interests of others for their own advantage. It also doesn't imply that Lewis was doing so in this essay. As in my silly example, a fool may really and truly believe that a reduction in cheating would be of a general benefit. Cynicism is to assume the fool was misrepresenting their opinion in order to gain some advantage of you. It is making a mistake to apply a general observation that happens in some cases to a specific instance where it may not apply. You might say "I'd rather make the assumption and be wrong and thereby avoid even the chance of being cheated", which is why I argue that cynicism is the enemy of virtue. An inability to trust in others makes it very hard indeed to act with virtue.

at_a_remove 3y ago
I will admit I have been mistrustful of Lewis since I was a small child. The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe was my first in memory experience of feeling like the author had attempted to put one over on me, with this Aslan business. I wanted to read a fantasy book, not a lecture in a RenFaire outfit. Indeed, much later I would read from Lewis that Aslan is not an allegory for Christ but something else. That kind of hair-splitting seemed like so much sophistry, but remember, it was for my supposed benefit. Ever since, I haven't been able to read Lewis without a feeling of what he thinks it would be better for me to believe, even when I went into The Screwtape Letters with anticipation. But I feel the sin resides with the one who does the misrepresentation, not the one who recognizes it exists and acts reasonably once it is identified.