Our post today on kant’s concept of radical evil is a grim reminder of what that philosopher understood, or sensed: the while secular modernity was a fundamental, that secular perspective is a fragmentary outcome with many incoherence zones. We see the dilemma on the left itself which intends to replace all thought with a version of historical materialism: the result can only be the triumph of psychopaths that we see in the era of bolshevism. Is that fair?
We can only say that the marxist cannon negates all ethical concepts in the name of a theory of history that, as science, negates ethics, kantian stuff all that bourgeois ideology. The left has to do better than that. The secular foundation is the right one, but the modern era gestated all the elements needed but they are a series of fragments with a pax vobiscum of the Enlightenment mantras for the new priesthood of the new atheists. Atheism is not a problem, until the new athiests made it a problem.
There are many deep aspects to the modern but secularists seem to have contracted into a cult of scientism. Let’s be clear: you can’t try to revive religion to deal with this problem. But secularists and leftists need to do better than the marxist recipe for psychopaths. The ethical hypocrisy of the bourgeois world was well seen by marx, but it doesn’t follow that ethics is a bourgeois delusion.
The great monotheisms have served their purpose in world history and our study of the eonic effect, which is neutral suggests they are passing away. The issue of islam is difficult given the realit…