Imaginary Friends
Notes On "Life Lies" and the Purpose of Faith
“Above all, do not lie to yourself.”
wrote Dostojewski1. I disagree.
Absurdity & Suffering
It stands to reason that there is no god 2 3 4 5. From which we may then conclude that there is no objective morality / meaning / purpose in the world either [citations]. Man must judge himself. We may discuss the semantics, the differences between “morality”, “meaning”, and “purpose” but I will use these words almost interchangeably throughout this text.
Any attempt to create purpose or meaning in life through logical reasoning ultimately leads to unresovable contradictions. [Why is that? Who else argued this, and what line of thought does this belong to?] Trying to resolve these leads to painful cognitive dissonances that can make life unbearable. You can either live in pain, obseccively trying to create a logically consistent framework for meaning, or stop torturing yourself and except that life life is fundamentally absurd [Camus].
Sisyphus he condemned by the gods to roll a boulder up a hill, only for it to roll back down each time he nears the top, forcing him to repeat the task for eternity. Camus interprets Sisyphus as a symbol of the human condition, where life’s struggles and pursuits ultimately seem futile and devoid of inherent meaning.
Despite this, Camus argues that Sisyphus can find meaning and fulfillment in embracing his absurd fate. By recognizing the absurdity of existence without succumbing to despair,
Sisyphus can rebel against the meaninglessness of the universe and find a sense of purpose in the act of defiance itself.
Thus, Camus advocates for embracing life’s challenges and finding personal meaning in the face of the absurd.
Painting of Sisyphus by Titian, 1549
Our Evololved Psychology
The human mind is not blank slate[^StevenPinkerSlate].
While the mind cannot provide an answer to what is the purpose of our existence, the physical brain has evolved to accept multiple explanations of the world that may contradict each other at the same time [citations]. We are not only capable of lying to others but it is a fundamental and very powerful psychological tool that we are able to rationalize anything and lie to ourselves. It is a necessity to create one or multiple “life lies”. [Why exactly?] I took the idea of “life lies” from Ernest Becker’s book on the human condition, “The Denial of Death”6 wherin he himself explains how he… Even though I disagree with the basic premise of his work, his analysis is brilliant. And “The Denial of Death” has likely been the most illuminating, life-defining book I have ever read.
Trouble comes with finding out what meaning we need to create, what lies to tell ourselves to live fulfilling lives. We are not just incredibly intelligent creatures we are also incredibly social creatures. As such we are very good at communicating with other people. Their reality, the social reality is what we see as real. To live an unexamined live is to not live at all. This also means that we listen to other people and accept their words more than we do with our own. We are prone to simply rationlize our own behaviour. In other words, we are prone to lie ourselves and stick with those as explained earlier and it is difficult to change that inner narrative ourselves. Rather, we seek out community and authority from others to tell us what to think so that we can adapt. This is what glues us together as a tribe since we depend on others to literally create meaning and reality.
Much of psychology and therapy is about it travelling a persons inner story, finding out the lies they tell themselves and collaboratively rewriting it as to turn it into a lie that causes pain and self destruction to one that helps the person heal and stabilize. [References?]
Divine Inspiration Through Active Self-Delusion
Jeanne d’Arc écoutant les voix by Eugène Thirion (1876, Notre Dame Church, Ville de Chatou)
The combination of these insights lends a simple explanation of the emergence of religion. The gods are an effective tool. As an imaginary authority created by society the individual can use them to reflect on their behaviour and world view without needing to go through the difficulty of self-reflection and creating fragile pieces of meaning to stabilize their own psychology. The gods are seen as real because they have been created or are acknowledged by society. And they can give advice and stand as an example of meaning and all sorts of moral ideals in the absence of other people. Thus with religion we can achieve psychological stability, and act morally and effectively as if part of a tribe even in the absence of it! This was crucial for larger societies early in the history of humanity to effectively uphold order and increase in their organization up until the invention of the state.
All actions are based on blind faith. In the absence of heroes, gods provide desperately needed inspiration. The Christian can ask: “What would Jesus Christ do?” and act, knowing it is good, where the Philosopher will write books for decades and still have no answer as to what he should do with his life. As a sidenote, if I had to summarize as to why I dislike so much of philosophy and pretty much all ideologies it is because while the rational mind evolved to lead it can also be a great tyrant. The great sickness of the rational mind is that it seeks to dominate all else. It was made to regulate other functions of the brain, the body, the self, to control the world. To make it his own by understanding it. But life does not require to be logically consistant. Life is not a problem to be solved. Life does not owe us a philosophy, a cause, meaning, or complete and non-selfcontradicting moral framework. In the absence of personal and cultural authority, to have such a deity functioning as an imaginary friend, mentor, leader, and disciplinary, the religious person retains agency. The depressed and isolated atheist is unable to motivate himself without the creation of an imaginative hero figure that will demand action of him. This can come in form of a god we may speak to and follow. Or an idea of our future self, a hero or god we may want to become ourselves.
High agency should not be achieved trough blind devotion towared the lies of others but to create ones own heroic stories that inspire us to bootstrap ourselves into action. Do not mistake my appreciation and wonder for religion as being a man of faith. I say all this as an atheist. Save yourself, to create your own story, become your own hero.
Heroes Must Lead
If all morality and purpose is constructed, how is it moral to become a leader of others? After all, it is a lie. Yet, people need heroes. Assuming we care about others, a moral imperative we may then derive is that we must become a hero so they can find a purpose in life, be inspired, and full of hope. From this standpoint, we then have a duty to firmly believe in our own life lies more than anyone else.
“Dimestore atheism” is a term often used to describe a superficial or simplistic rejection of religious beliefs or faith without deeply engaging with theological or philosophical arguments. It suggests an attitude that dismisses religion without careful consideration or understanding of its complexities.
“The trappings of faith” refer to the outward symbols, rituals, and practices associated with religious belief. These can include things like attending religious services, observing religious holidays, wearing specific garments or symbols, and participating in rituals such as prayer or meditation.
The phrase “dimestore atheism and the trappings of faith” juxtaposes these two concepts, suggesting a contrast between a shallow, perhaps unreflective rejection of religion and the outward manifestations of religious belief. It may imply a critique of both extremes—on one hand, a lack of intellectual depth in atheistic arguments, and on the other, a superficial adherence to religious customs without a deeper understanding of their significance.
The Schizophrenic Fever Dream of Reality
Figurative & Literal Truths
Let me give an example. Ignoring the controversy in quantum mechanics regarding the measurement problem, let’s assume that which had been established up until now and can still be argued, that is: the universe is fully deterministic, super-deterministic, in fact. That is a literal truth. But figuratively, it isn’t as it makes no practical sense for us to act as if this was true. Because what would that imply? Many would argue that then there was no free will, and yes, that is another literal truth about the world. One may then argue that we are not responsible for our actions either since the universe is but a giant clock work! We have no choice! Literally true but it would be false to act like this. And so it is figuratively false.
A technical explanation for why it doesn’t really matter why everything is super-determined is because of chaos. Chaos theory tells us that even many small systems can act completely unpredictabally beyond a short time horizons and that small changes in the initial conditions will have vastly different consequences. (The the Butterfly Effect [^ButterflyEffect].) A beautiful woman might stare at a mirror on a sunny day, yet that small reflection blinds a man down the street while driving and suddenly he runs you over as you attempt to cross the street. If the mirror had been at a slightly different angle, this would not have happend and you could have lived another 40 years. We can’t live life as if it was fully determined nor as if it was fully random. Rather, it is a chaos we have to fight through.