AntiDem

Nyan is a really smart dude; the problem in this case is that he’s an engineer. There are lots of engineers (here I use the term loosely to include things like software engineering) in neoreaction/the Dark Enlightenment. That’s good, because engineers tend to be smart people. But the thing is, they think like engineers. Engineering is not just a field of study - it’s a worldview, a mindset, a way of approaching problems. What engineers too often forget, however, is that the engineering mindset is *a* way to look at the world, it is not *the* way to look at the world. It works really well for answering certain types of questions and solving certain types of problems, and works really badly for answering other types of questions and solving other types of problems.
The issue here is the application of engineering thinking to areas of life in which it does not belong. The engineering mindset says that if it would be useful to have something around, solving the problem of making it appear is relatively straightforward. You just have to acquire the appropriate components and bolt them together in the right order, and - presto, change-o, blammo - you have a working machine that does what you need it to do. Solder the last connections in place and you’re off to the races.
This is the approach that Nyan is taking to religion. He acknowledges that it would be useful to a healthy civilization to have a religion around. He has studiously analyzed which components would go into building a religion that would have all the design characteristics he believes are optimal. He has carefully bolted those components together in what he is sure is the right order. He has soldered all the connections, lubricated all the moving parts with MILSPEC PRF-6082E high-viscosity oil, and - presto, change-o, blammo - has unveiled a new religion for us all to follow. Now let us pray, brothers - Amen.
Except that religion doesn’t work like that. It really, really doesn’t work like that.
Someone once said that every Enlightenment (and there have been a lot of them in human history) produces some good ideas, and also a bunch of really bad ideas. The Dark Enlightenment is no different. It’s still an experimental philosophy, and ideas get bounced around, many of which are unfinished or purely theoretical or otherwise not ready for prime time. Some of the ideas tossed about within our circles will be world-rockingly brilliant, others unoriginal but useful, and still others downright silly. I don’t see anything wrong with that - it’s all part of working towards having a finished philosophy consisting of ideas that have been debated and vetted and carefully considered by many minds. In the kind of culture of open debate that we want to encourage in order to do make this process flow, we should never be too harsh on someone for coming up with a silly idea.
So I hope no offense is taken, nor is anyone too discouraged, when I say: this is a really silly idea.

View more