It is not that the ethical skeptic cannot make and hold dear a metaphysical selection – it is rather, the path one undertakes to get there, and what one does with it thereafter, which makes all the difference.
A religious pitch is a common way for an individual to spread influence and extract conformity to his view of the world from his fellow man. A psychological need underpins this natural human foible, as the attainment of conformity from another serves as a kind of confirmation salve which assuages the pitch-maker’s inner fear. The pitch itself may differ between clubs which are in conflict, but the essential nature and structure of the pitch never changes. For instance, the essential structure of the conversion-seeking Dunning-Kruger argument, is at its core – a religious pitch. A God or gods, churches, synagogues, etc. have nothing to do with the essential nature of the approach, nor do they stand as indicative of any fundamental difference between the various religious clubs.
They are here to tell you again, the same exact entity/method/virtue (EMV) construct you have heard before, under the false presumption that you did not get it, the last 5,936 times you had their message pushed on you. What follows is the essential nature of such a religious pitch:
The Religious Pitch
1. I Am the Good (Club)
That you personally and your club represent a/the higher entity/method/virtue or all that is the attainable good inside reality.
2. Others are Not the Good
That your fellow man, whom you regard to not be in the Club, represents a/the lowest entity/method/virtue and is neutral to bad inside reality.
3. I Hold Critical EMV Sophia
That your cognition includes a critical grasp of ‘what counts’ inside the nature of reality; the acceptable, the bad, truth, rationality, effectiveness and what happens upon our passing from this realm.
4. Others Need Conversion
That others have never heard the repetition of, nor the specific narrative and details involved in 1 – 3 above before – or if they did, they did not get it or did not hear it expressed correctly.
5. My Club is Immortal/Omniscient and Exclusively Sanctioned by a Standard of Awesomeness
That your Club has never been any different, held any different beliefs, nor violently filtered out any essential portion of its teachings or people; and its Critical EMV Sophia has never not existed, nor really changed in any significant way. It holds exclusive license and grasp of some iconic standard of specific awesomeness, such as God or Science or Critical Thinking.
6. Blind Eye
Doubt any threatening ideas, but never doubt the Club or any single tenet inside its doctrine. Fear the club or its awesome standard. Especially do not question Club history in oppressing or harming others or mankind through these first five character traits above.
• Critical Thinking/Rationality Clubs
• Nihilistic Atheism/Material Monism
• Club Skepticism (Social Skepticism)
Science holds itself accountable, and in a way – celebrates exposure of its own misadventure.
Religious thinking conceals its foibles and ignores its failures.
However, inside each of the above religious pitch clubs, there are individuals who practice the ethic which follows.
The essence of ethical skepticism is this:
There is No Club – Club Quality does not work (see #2. below).
Good Intentions Serve to Harm – Good intentions are a way of deceiving self in seeking god-ship over others. Even if harm is not intended, it will still occur as a result. We are to serve needs but not act as a ‘needs broker’. The market of mercy should be flat, and contain few cartel-like entities.
I Do Not Hold Sophia – I do not possess the cognition of any critical entity/method/virtue. I hold myself accountable precisely because of this knowledge.
Truth is Non-Robust/Change is Inevitable – If you are not evolving, you are dying.
Tolerance – Others only need instruction when they operate under the Religious Pitch – then relax thereafter, as the rest will come.
Never a Blind Eye – Go Look. Always question to increase value or reduce risk (not just ‘doubt’ – see #2 above).
It is not that the ethical skeptic has to arrive at a conclusion at all. Nor that he or she cannot choose and hold dear a metaphysical selection, nor any kind of inspiration or meaning to life, even if esoteric and unprovable – it is rather, the path you undertake to get there, and what you do with it thereafter, which makes all the difference.
The Ethical Skeptic, “The Essential Mind of the Religious Pitch” The Ethical Skeptic, WordPress, 23 Nov 2018; Web, https://wp.me/p17q0e-8MF