When Will The End Of The World Nonsense End?

[Ed Hudgins]

When Will The End Of The World Nonsense End?

By Edward Hudgins

December 21, 2012 -- Yawn! The world ended again, this time on December 21, 2012, as predicted by the Mayan calendar. Seems few of the actual Mayans in the Yucatan today were particularly concerned about this.

It was folks in the most advanced industrialized countries who shivered in fear of the apocalypse, who flooded NASA with phone and email messages asking whether the prophecy was true, and who headed for the hills in attempts to survive or perhaps to be taken up into heaven, the Mother Ship, or whatever.

Okay, this particular doomsday might have been mostly hype by the media meant to titillate sensationalist-seeking audiences. But these doomsday fears pop up on a regular basis and too many people actually take them seriously.

Last year fundamentalist fruitcake Harold Camping predicted The End, using his 66 radio stations to get the word out. Many of his followers gave away their possessions in preparation for the Rapture. A woman who believed him wanted to avoid the horrors of fire and brimstone so she slit her 11- and 14-year-old daughters' throats with a box cutter and then slit her own. (All survived.)

Clear-thinking individuals often don't understand why folks with even a minimum of intelligence and education can fall for this stuff.

First, culture matters. In the twenty-first century most folks appreciate the products that come from the rational mind, everything from advanced medical devices to the iPad. But t reason itself is hardly venerated. Rather, indulgence of undisciplined impulses saturates our culture with the most idiotic and pernicious products, spiritual as well as material. New Age cults are one of these products, manifested in people wasting what few functioning neurons they still have worrying about whether primitive peoples half a millennium ago predicted the end of the world.

Second the virtue of rationality is an attribute of individuals. We must exercise it, each of us, one mind and one brain at a time. And it takes an effort to think. A culture that values the virtue of reason as well as its products is important. But you develop that virtue through practice, not through osmosis.

Third, to be rational doesn’t simply mean to memorize the forms of the syllogism or to master the knowledge and technical skills needed to be successful in some narrow field or profession. Most of the 39 Heaven’s Gate cult members who committed mass suicide in 1997 earned money as website developers. Rationality means always being honest with one’s self. It means always asking, “Am I trying to get at the truth or simply to rationalize some prejudice or convenient belief that bears little resemblance to reality?” It means practicing self-reflection, monitoring one’s thoughts and emotions to make sure they are not clouding one’s mind. It means practicing the virtue of integrity, of making certain that one’s thinking and actions are in sync. And it means exercising one’s independent judgment and not letting one’s beliefs be determined by group-think and popular opinion.

Those who fall for predictions of Armageddon certainly don’t practice the virtue of rationality.

Those who laughed at the foolish fears over the Mayan doomsday should take a mental step back and understand the cause of this and so much else that’s wrong with our culture today. And they should understand that a commitment to reason and rationality will both guide one to a happy and flourishing life and help create a wonderful world as it can be and should be.
-----
Hudgins is director of advocacy for The Atlas Society.

For further reading:

*Edward Hudgins, “Betting Against the End of the World.” May 17, 2011.

*Edward Hudgins, “After the Apocalypse, Try Reason.” May 27, 2011.

*Edward Hudgins, “Getting to Our Fantastic, Non-fiction Future.” Winter, 2010.

[9thdoctor]

Why did you wait until so late in the day to put this out? One might suspect you wanted to be sure the worst didn't come true before scoffing at it all. Even grumpy cat weighed in ahead of you!

[caroljane]

Do you really consider the Mayans to be one of the "primitive peoples"?

The Doctor's cat sure didn't!

It may be primitive of modern credulous types to believe, but it was no more primitive of the Mayan astronomers to predict, than it was of their contemporary Europeans to judge that the sun moved around the earth . They all used the evidence of their senses and were as rational as they could be.

[Kyle Jacob Biodrowski]

Why did you wait until so late in the day to put this out? One might suspect you wanted to be sure the worst didn't come true before scoffing at it all. Even grumpy cat weighed in ahead of you!

Maybe he just finished it late. Or maybe he wanted to post it late so others wouldn't scoff and say "well it hasn't happened yet now has it, so you can't be sure".

Good faith, good Doctor, Good faith.

[9thdoctor]

Good faith, good Doctor, Good faith.

Not to worry, Ed can identify and take a poke in the ribs. You're awfully new around here to be wagging your finger.

[Xray]

Clear-thinking individuals often don't understand why folks with even a minimum of intelligence and education can fall for this stuff.

I think it has to do with the 'evolutionary baggage' we humans still carry around with us. For if one looks at the issue from the perspective of cosmic time, not that much time has evolved since the 'magic thinking phase' our stone-age forefathers lived in.

Imo this magic thinking is part of our evolutionary heritage (although it does not manifest itself in all people). But the unbroken success of astrology, tarot cards, the use of lucky charms and much other esoteric stuff is ample evidence that the inclinatinon to use magic thinking is still quite vivid in the human brain.

[Brant Gaede]

Clear-thinking individuals often don't understand why folks with even a minimum of intelligence and education can fall for this stuff.

I think it has to do with the 'evolutionary baggage' we humans still carry around with us. For if one looks at the issue from the perspective of cosmic time, not that much time has evolved since the 'magic thinking phase' our stone-age forefathers lived in.

Imo this magic thinking is part of our evolutionary heritage (although it does not manifest itself in all people). But the unbroken success of astrology, tarot cards, the use of lucky charms and much other esoteric stuff is ample evidence that the inclinatinon to use magic thinking is still quite vivid in the human brain.

All superior to modern philosophical education.

--Brant

[Jerry Biggers]

Do you really consider the Mayans to be one of the "primitive peoples"?

The Doctor's cat sure didn't!

It may be primitive of modern credulous types to believe, but it was no more primitive of the Mayan astronomers to predict, than it was of their contemporary Europeans to judge that the sun moved around the earth . They all used the evidence of their senses and were as rational as they could be.

I suppose that it depends upon what your definition of "primitive" is, but I would certainly question the description of the Mayan civilizations (there were at least four, each of which collapsed apparently having learned nothing to prevent their own demise from the previous civilization) as "as rational as they could be." Tell that to the thousands of victims sacrificed in Mayan religious ceremonies - many of which having the priests of their religion literally ripping the beating heart out of their victim. And then kicking the decapitated heads down the steps of their pyramids, followed by their bodies.

Unlike the Aztecs (who also practiced human sacrifice on a larger scale), whose empire was conquered by the Spanish (with the considerable aid and support of surrounding native tribes who did not particularly enjoy being subjugated - and often ritually sacrificed -by the Aztecs, the Mayan city states had largely collapsed, followed by the abandonment of their cities prior to the arrival of the Spanish.

Yes, the Mayans had considerable achievements in mathematics and astronomy. Using the word, "astronomy", is probably a misnomer. Astrology is a more accuate description, and was the primary motivation for their charting the stars. The quality and usefulness of the predictions achieved by this method can be ascertained by the fact that its use did not foretell and prevent the destruction of at least four entirely separate Mayan civilizations..

Politically, through most of their existence, the Mayan city-states were run by ridgid theocracies who tolerated no dissent (unless the protestors wished to be "guests" (i.e., victims) at the next religious ceremony. The city-states spent a lot of their energies warring with each and also with other native tribes.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

In case nobody noticed, the world did end.

We just slid over to one of those parallel universes from quantum physics.

I'm already enjoying my afterlife...

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

In case nobody noticed, the world did end.

We just slid over to one of those parallel universes from quantum physics.

I'm already enjoying my afterlife...

Michael

You already were--since the dinosaurs.

--Brant

I wish you'd tell us about the "missing link"

[caroljane]

Do you really consider the Mayans to be one of the "primitive peoples"?

The Doctor's cat sure didn't!

It may be primitive of modern credulous types to believe, but it was no more primitive of the Mayan astronomers to predict, than it was of their contemporary Europeans to judge that the sun moved around the earth . They all used the evidence of their senses and were as rational as they could be.

I suppose that it depends upon what your definition of "primitive" is, but I would certainly question the description of the Mayan civilizations (there were at least four, each of which collapsed apparently having learned nothing to prevent their own demise from the previous civilization) as "as rational as they could be." Tell that to the thousands of victims sacrificed in Mayan religious ceremonies - many of which having the priests of their religion literally ripping the beating heart out of their victim. And then kicking the decapitated heads down the steps of their pyramids, followed by their bodies.

Unlike the Aztecs (who also practiced human sacrifice on a larger scale), whose empire was conquered by the Spanish (with the considerable aid and support of surrounding native tribes who did not particularly enjoy being subjugated - and often ritually sacrificed -by the Aztecs, the Mayan city states had largely collapsed, followed by the abandonment of their cities prior to the arrival of the Spanish.

Yes, the Mayans had considerable achievements in mathematics and astronomy. Using the word, "astronomy", is probably a misnomer. Astrology is a more accuate description, and was the primary motivation for their charting the stars. The quality and usefulness of the predictions achieved by this method can be ascertained by the fact that its use did not foretell and prevent the destruction of at least four entirely separate Mayan civilizations..

Politically, through most of their existence, the Mayan city-states were run by ridgid theocracies who tolerated no dissent (unless the protestors wished to be "guests" (i.e., victims) at the next religious ceremony. The city-states spent a lot of their energies warring with each and also with other native tribes.

You are right of course Jerry, - I almost wrote "astrologers" instead of astronomers, but I suppose they thought of themselves as astronomers in their way. But I still think, considering the progress of different cultures, and the nature of the human sacrifices to religious feeling that have been made, that we cannot say they were primitive and we are not.

[BaalChatzaf]

Yes, the Mayans had considerable achievements in mathematics and astronomy. Using the word, "astronomy", is probably a misnomer. Astrology is a more accuate description, and was the primary motivation for their charting the stars. The quality and usefulness of the predictions achieved by this method can be ascertained by the fact that its use did not foretell and prevent the destruction of at least four entirely separate Mayan civilizations..

No doubt the Maya put a great deal of religious weight on their celestial discoveries. Even so the Maya got the alignment of the visible planets right. Their observation of Venus was surpassed only by Tycho Brahe (prior to the time of telescopes). They got the 19 year moon cycle right. They got the length of the year pretty well on. Better than the Europeans did until the emergence of the Julian calendar. Some even think they got the precession of the earth axis right. In addition to the astronomy their arithmetic was light years ahead of the European. They calibrated a calendar that extent 10 to 20 th power years, The produced the arithmetic functional equivalent of the zero (a place holder in their positional system) and positional base 20 arithmetic, way ahead of the Romans, the Greeks and the Hebrews. Only the Babylonian got a positional system (base 60) in their part of the world.

The Mayans in some respects were ahead of the Europeans and the folks of the Agean and the Middle East.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[anthony]

Who's this "they"? The entire Mayan race? Doubtful, Bob.

That a few individuals in every culture follow their minds independently, and leave behind great works, says nothing of their fellow men.

Their (often condemned) contributions to science and mathematics, per se, don't establish the excellence or longevity of a nation - freedom based on a sane philosophy does.

[Xray]

Clear-thinking individuals often don't understand why folks with even a minimum of intelligence and education can fall for this stuff.

I think it has to do with the 'evolutionary baggage' we humans still carry around with us. For if one looks at the issue from the perspective of cosmic time, not that much time has evolved since the 'magic thinking phase' our stone-age forefathers lived in.

Imo this magic thinking is part of our evolutionary heritage (although it does not manifest itself in all people). But the unbroken success of astrology, tarot cards, the use of lucky charms and much other esoteric stuff is ample evidence that the inclinatinon to use magic thinking is still quite vivid in the human brain.

All superior to modern philosophical education.

--Brant

I can't see much evidence of "modern philosophical education" showing up in official school curricula - therefore pushing this educational goal forward may well be worth the effort.

As a teacher of the young, I know how impressively even children of kindergarten age can reflect about the world, and always encourage their 'philosophial inquiries' as much as I can.

[9thdoctor]

What’s interesting is that Objectivism has an apocalyptic element in it too. Peikoff said Bush’s reelection would be “apocalyptically bad”, and something similar about Obama. He also predicts an “imminent” theocratic takeover of the US, within a few decades at the outside. Rand herself said the world was speeding towards disaster in her interview with Mike Wallace in 1959. However with the Berlin Wall in the near future and global nuclear war a new threat at that time, I’m inclined to pass on criticizing her on that score.

[9thdoctor]

When Will The End Of The World Nonsense End?

"If something that makes no sense to you (say, religionif you are an atheistor some age-old habit or practice called irrational); if that something has been around for a very, very long time, then, irrational or not, you can expect it to stick around much longer, and outlive those who call for its demise."

Nassim Taleb, Antifragile, Chapter 20

[Ed Hudgins]

Hi all! Yes, I, along with the Earth and all the cosmos, survived. (Unless this is a parrallel universe!)

Evolutionary baggage indeed contributes to the magic thinking that leads to such beliefs. Of course, a goal of the practice of rationality is to overcome that baggage. We have a hardwired desire for sweet and fatty foods that no doubt had survival value a 100,00 years ago. But we discipline ourselves today because eating too much of this readily-available food could end our survival. We are hardwired to be "tribal," which probably had survival value in primitive times when those who didn't look like us probably were going to hit us with a club. Today we try to form moral habits that minimize this innate tendency.

There's a lot of controversy about the evolutionary function of magic or religious thinking. (See Dawkins, Boyers.) And all rational people try to minimze this tendency as well. Those who indulge it and let it run wide end up worrying about the end of the world.

Cheers!

Ed

[syrakusos]

What’s interesting is that Objectivism has an apocalyptic element in it too. Peikoff said Bush’s reelection would be “apocalyptically bad”, and something similar about Obama. He also predicts an “imminent” theocratic takeover of the US, within a few decades at the outside. Rand herself said the world was speeding towards disaster in her interview with Mike Wallace in 1959. However with the Berlin Wall in the near future and global nuclear war a new threat at that time, I’m inclined to pass on criticizing her on that score.

I agree. I recommend highly The Future and Its Enemies by Reason editor Virginia Postrel.

It is true that ideas have consequences. Bad political choices lead to contractions and even collapses. Rome came and went ... but it took 1200 years, maybe 1500. Rome celebrated its Millennium during the reign of Phillip II ("The Arab") in 248, during what we now call the Military Anarchy. Even when the Goths were sacking Rome, new villas were being built at Ostia on the coast. And the invasion by barbarians did not necessarily signal the end of anything: Rome had been invaded by Gauls and Hannibal when it was a young republic. What looks to us as "Pax Romana" was only the consistent looiting of the Hellenstic world, a different civilization entirely.

Atlas Shrugged presents an apocalypse and I for one bought into it for many years. "Going Galt" is another call to emanatize the eschaton. Fortress farms are personalized festung Europa, from the same mentality: "Wir werden weiter marschieren bis alles in Scherben faellt...." The desire for Ragnarok.

It may be confirmation bias, but I see this reflected in the wider culture. In comics, the consequences of the titanic battles between superheroes and supervillians are continuing problems: thousands dead, square miles of city destroyed, leaving tectonic pits where once skyscrapers stood, wealth now in short supply, beyond the puny resources of Tony Stark and Bruce Waye. This was not a theme in the Silver Age, or even through the "Marvel Age."

[BaalChatzaf]

Who's this "they"? The entire Mayan race? Doubtful, Bob.

That a few individuals in every culture follow their minds independently, and leave behind great works, says nothing of their fellow men.

Their (often condemned) contributions to science and mathematics, per se, don't establish the excellence or longevity of a nation - freedom based on a sane philosophy does.

No. It was their priestly class who both the time, power and liberty to pursue such interests. There was also a class of artisans and technicians who executed the design for the building of their pyramids which were as elaborate as anything the Egyptian, Babylonians or Sumerians did. The Maya also had an extensive irrigation system that was on a par with Rome's. Apparently the Mayans bred enough capable people to build a very elaborate civilization.

As to a philosophy? The Maya were very time conscious and very much in touch with the sky and seasons. They knew when to plant and when to sow, and they did not want for bread and fruit until some kind of drought or climate upset undid them. The Maya were undone by some kind of environmental mishap around 750 c.e. that caused them to abandon their cities. The Mayans were not conquered by outsiders, as were the Aztecs.

ruveyn

[Xray]

What’s interesting is that Objectivism has an apocalyptic element in it too. Peikoff said Bush’s reelection would be “apocalyptically bad”, and something similar about Obama. He also predicts an “imminent” theocratic takeover of the US, within a few decades at the outside. Rand herself said the world was speeding towards disaster in her interview with Mike Wallace in 1959. However with the Berlin Wall in the near future and global nuclear war a new threat at that time, I’m inclined to pass on criticizing her on that score.

It would be interesting to examine whether the idea of an apocalypse shows up in all dogmatic thought systems.

[9thdoctor]

It would be interesting to examine whether the idea of an apocalypse shows up in all dogmatic thought systems.

How about Marxism? Marx regarded Communism as historically inevitable, enough so that one wonders why anyone would ever die (or even, perhaps, kill) for it.

"The basic problem," he proposes, "has always been getting other people to die for you. What's worth enough for a man to give up his life? That's where religion had the edge, for centuries. Religion was always about death. It was used not as an opiate so much as a technique-it got people to die for one particular set of beliefs about death. Perverse, natürlich, but who are you to judge? It was a good pitch while it worked. But ever since it became impossible to die for death, we have had a secular version-yours. Die to help History grow to its predestined shape. Die knowing your act will bring a good end a bit closer. Revolutionary suicide, fine. But look: if History's changes are inevitable, why not not die? Vaslav? If it's going to happen anyway, what does it matter?"

Thomas Pynchon, Gravity's Rainbow, p.701

[Xray]

It would be interesting to examine whether the idea of an apocalypse shows up in all dogmatic thought systems.

How about Marxism? Marx regarded Communism as historically inevitable, enough so that one wonders why anyone would ever die (or even, perhaps, kill) for it.

I too had been thinking of Marxism as a classic example, with its 'prediction' that the capitalist system would inevitably perish, and be replaced by a new Communist paradise on earth.

Ideas of 'revenge' on those who happen to have the 'wrong consciousness' is also frequently present in dogmatic thought.