We Are Not Saved

Nietzsche claimed that "God is dead", and predicted that as this became apparent the world would descend into nihilism. But what if there are god-like extraterrestrials out there? Or what if we can create our own gods using AI? How does that change his prediction of nihilism? The question seems to depend on whether there is some universal system of morality. If not, I argue, the consequences will be every bit as bad as Nietzsche predicted.

The coming fight over who will replace Anthony Kennedy has once again brought up the subject of whether all values should determined at the highest level possible. People are worried that if Kennedy is replaced that Roe v Wade will be overturned. But of course what isn't emphasized is that this will just move the issue back to the states. Are we sure that this and other issues really have to be all the same across the entire nation? Or that doing it this way has not made things worse? I'm not...

I introduce the idea of "The Mistake of Dramatic Timing" which affects most of the thinking about Fermi's Paradox. I review a particularly egregious example of it in the Bobiverse series. I then go on to discuss my issues with a recent paper which claimed to "Dissolve Fermi's Paradox".

It's the 100th Episode! Okay don't get too excited, mostly I'm using this to question why I even do this. Hubris! And whether I should change anything going forward. (Probably, but nothing big.) The upshot is I think I have at least 100 more in me so I'll be here for awhile.

In a recent detailed critique, Phil Torres lays out all the ways in which Pinker's chapter on existential risks from Enlightenment Now, gets the discipline of existential risks entirely wrong. As this one of my areas of interest I examine Torres' arguments, but also I add a religious aspect to the entire thing which Torres intentionally avoids. In the end it's apparent that Pinker made repeated errors in the chapter, and that Torres despite being in a much better position could also probably learn something from looking at religion.

I start off by telling of an amazing crime involving pizza delivery. From there I wonder about the incidence of crime in general, and whether there's any relationship to homelessness. My own impression is that homelessness is increasing, this doesn't appear to correlate to an increase in crime, nor does it correlate to an improving economy. Why is that? Why has homelessness not declined significantly during this most recent economic expansion?

I discuss Taleb's new book Skin in the Game, and how it connects to recent themes of survival and religion. But I guess you get all that from the title... I wonder if anyone even reads theses. I'm guessing not. If you do and you email me I'll give you a prize!

Every single person alive today makes a choice about how to live their life, specifically whether to believe in God and an existence beyond this one or not. Though, rather than being two choices I think it's best to think of there being four possible choices: 1- Religion 2- Athiesm 3- Transhumanism 4- Apathy Despite convention wisdom, the data says that the first choices is far and away the best.

Most modern thinkers prioritize happiness over survival. Some take this prioritization to such an extreme that they advocate that the entire human race go extinct. Using this as a jumping off point I discuss happiness vs. survival, why survival is more important and why the recent focus on happiness is endangering it. Show Notes

Incels, or the involuntarily celibate have been much discussed since the Toronto Van Attack in April by someone who claimed that title. Obviously advocating the initiation of violence for nearly any reason is a bad thing. And that covers the Van Attack and one or two other instances, but what about people who are frustrated and sad, but not violent? What about people who are just sad? What if they're so sad they're suicidal? How should we treat these people?