22nd century apologetics

I’ve been reading articles that express concern about the rather loony fundamentalism of Sarah Palin, the Republican VP candidate. (For example, Matt Taibi, Sam Harris.) American conservatism is seriously dangerous for the planet, both environmentally, and because some conservatives are crazy enough to start a nuclear war to fulfill their apocalyptic fantasies. (Mind you, the thought of someone like Sam Harris with access to nuclear weapons is also scary.)

Anyway, if (not a small if) civilization manages to survive into the early 22nd century, we can be certain that the fundamentalists will still be around. And their intellectuals (all three of them) will be arguing that since it was so unlikely that civilization would survive the environmental and nuclear threats of the 21st century, it must have been the Hand of God who guided us through and helped us survive.

If, on the other hand, we blow ourselves up or poison ourselves or bring on catastrophic climate change, we can still be certain that there will be fundamentalists alive alongside the cockroaches. And we can also be certain that they will be arguing that the disaster of the 21st century was brought on by liberals and secularists and godless scientists—anyone skeptical of the blend of Jesus and the Free Market they will still be worshiping.

"My only exposure to Haidt has been his talk to the high school, which was ..."

Tim Crane on Religious Violence
"I reject the inference from e3 to g, as the rationale is not presented. The ..."

Problems With TASO – Part 2: ..."
"Luke,1) Please give me a more complete reference to the Converse study. When I hear ..."

Tolerating the Intolerant: The Central Paradox ..."
"1) To generalize from yourself to a majority of citizens is to deny the empirical ..."

Tolerating the Intolerant: The Central Paradox ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment