The way I read that, I thought he was talking about even larger, longer term societal structures. Like, imagine many generations of atheist eudaimonia that doesn’t collapse on itself—creating ridiculous new philosophy-religions, over generations.
Whether a society of atheists could endure, was a question often discussed during the Enlightenment, though never decided. If the question is generalized a little, however, from ‘atheists’ to ‘Positivists,’ then it seems obvious enough that the answer to it is ‘no.’
The author’s future history seems to involve static human nature at play for a long, long time.
Kant and Hegel, or some other equally ‘great thinkers’, will still be read with reverence by the most intelligent and educated part of mankind, long after modern science is forgotten, or is confined to a few secret departments of the bureaucracy.
Someone needs to give this guy a hug. Or, even better, a copy of “Engines of Creation”.
Hi, “first time, long time.” :->
The way I read that, I thought he was talking about even larger, longer term societal structures. Like, imagine many generations of atheist eudaimonia that doesn’t collapse on itself—creating ridiculous new philosophy-religions, over generations.
The author’s future history seems to involve static human nature at play for a long, long time.
Someone needs to give this guy a hug. Or, even better, a copy of “Engines of Creation”.
And, according to wikipedia, he died in 1994...