Capitalism, Government, Harvesting The Young

Are You Ready To Consider That Capitalism Is The Real Problem?:

In February, college sophomore Trevor Hill stood up during a televised town hall meeting in New York and posed a simple question to Nancy Pelosi, the leader of the Democrats in the House of Representatives. He cited a study by Harvard University showing that 51% of Americans between the ages of 18 and 29 no longer support the system of capitalism, and asked whether the Democrats could embrace this fast-changing reality and stake out a clearer contrast to right-wing economics.

I can only guess that Trevor and even the author of the column do the breathing thing, and I further assume that their feet were on the ground .... however it seems questionable if their "heads are there to move them around" -- although I'm sure he is smarter than a college freshman.

Assuming this, they are also subject to the effects of markets -- and government, which they conveniently fail to talk about. The US economy was definitely "mixed". The BOistan economy is about as "capitalist" as a casino in Vegas. It is rigged to allow DC which our founders would have thought would be full of "servants" to be the wealthiest area in the country to win, just like "the house" in Vegas. It can't be otherwise -- if you don't MAKE, you have to TAKE -- in Vegas from your gambling patrons, in the case of government from the citizens and future citizens.

There are a set of things in the universe that "just are" -- they aren't "good or bad", they ARE! Accepting the reality of what IS can be hugely helpful, both personally and societally -- it is like having basic clue on reality. (a REALLY high bar for 18-29 year olds!)

Therefore, "Government" is IN the market system as well, as everything/everyone is, and obviously has to be. The government takes resources from some parts of the economy, takes a portion for themselves,  and gives to others to protect and expand their interests through buying/selling goods, votes, benefits, taxes, just as all of us do. The big difference between government and the rest of the market is that it never produces anything -- it only moves resources around. It is a bit like the financial sector, but with no profit motive, and FAR fewer controls. (

The government MAKES the rules, and decides where, when, and on whom they will be enforced -- very rarely will the government itself, or any of it's favored friends -- Democrats, media, unions, higher education ... but I'm just repeating myself.

Before BOistan, there was a nation called the United States. That nation had a magical thing called LIMITED government. There were checks and balances as well as Constitutional restrictions  (that nation actually followed a written constitution) on how powerful the government could become.

These restrictions were modelled after markets. When there is a huge need for a product, the price goes up and more providers start to provide that product causing the price to go down until there is a "balance" where price provides a constant indicator to the market as to how much to provide. If there were really big needs, the government could get things like "2/3 majorities" or "Constitutional Amendments", but otherwise it had to live with it's limits.

Government got rid of the limits, so it is now like the Mob entering a market. The market is  STILL "a market", it is just "black / corrupt / criminal" -- like the market for drugs in prison. Let's take healthcare as an example -- first The Mob (government) decides who can play in the market through licensing, regulation, fees, taxes, etc. Then they execute "pay-offs" -- certain groups, say unions, elderly people, the poor, doctors, etc are "paid off" ... provided "protection", or "deals", with at least the tacit assumption that they will support the Mob (government / Democrats). Some are provided lucrative deals -- like the doctors and the lawyers. Since most of the politicians are also lawyers , it helps to think of lawyers as highly paid hit men. Usually they just financially destroy you -- but if they have to, prision, and even the death penalty is in their power.

Sometimes other "protection rackets" rise up -- to provide "insurance" for a price. In the medical crime area we call it "insurance" (wink, wink). There is usually an uneasy peace with the various insurance providers -- the Mob (gov) would like to have ALL the action, but given proper kick-backs, cover, etc, they see it as beneficial for the "insurers" to have a piece of the action.

Mobs (gov) tend to be greedy. Where individuals formerly went to a doctor who dealt with their problem one on one with minimal mob/gov oversight, good doctors that provided good service at a good price were successful, and bad doctors found other employment.

As gov/mob increasingly entered the picture, certifications, costs of entering the profession, limits on how many doctors there could be, regulations, taxes, fees, records, kickbacks, requirements for increasingly expensive "insurance" (mobs breed mobs), etc grew without bound -- more and more players desire a piece of the action, and since the gov/mob is getting pay-offs from all of them, they encourage that generally non-productive (for us, VERY productive for them) "growth".

"The Real Problem" always comes down to human nature -- we tend to fall into believing that "someone else will solve our problems" -- and the "someone else" in this mortal coil always becomes corrupt and creates greater problems than what they were supposedly solving. Eventually economic collapse, violence, poverty, hopelessness, etc result because the "Real Problem" is **US**!!!!!

If that wasn't bad enough, look at the people who the article is listening to -- Americans 18-29! The eternal fount of a lot of things -- wisdom definitely not being one of them!!

You will always see the "mob/government" trying to increase the set of people who support them, which will always mean things like surveying younger people, lowering voting ages and reducing any sort of restriction on voting (citizenship, ID, etc), because while there is indeed a "sucker born every day", as the suckers age, some of them learn by experience and become aware adults -- no matter how much the gov/mob works to prevent that, however, the encouragement to dependence becomes ever stronger.

FICA, Medicare, Welfare, low income housing, etc, etc all seek to make a greater and greater percentage of people dependent on the government, and both intentionally and unintentionally weakening family, church and local community. 

As we saw in the USSR, are starting to see in China (Hong Kong riots, Corona), North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela,  etc, the "dream" (nightmare) of socialism rises until if fails massively and people are reduced to living by the raw "survival of the fittest" -- and then the natural mechanism of ACTUAL Capitalism (not corrupt crony capitalism) arises, wealth /' culture / religion result, and the cycle begins again.

Since most people find history boring, we get to repeat it with war, starvation, corruption, etc at various levels of horror -- the "fruits" of our fallen nature.

Corona Turning Point?

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/03/is-the-stock-market-crazy.php

One can only hope ... agree that the BIG question may well be "before November or not"?

If it is a "not", then recovery is likely at least 5 years away if Trump loses.

The path of INTELLIGENT globalization, keeping most / all critical industries / technologies in the US and controlling immigration to only those likely to benefit the US are all key -- and in opposition to Democrat agendas.

I am pretty certain that in less than ten years, coronavirus will be seen as a turning point that favored the U.S. economy over that of China and perhaps other third-world countries. Let’s hope that becomes clear by the Fall.

Socialist Sweden Heaven Myth

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/bernie-sanderss-scandinavian-fantasy/2020/02/27/ee894d6e-599f-11ea-9b35-def5a027d470_story.html

Socialism vacillates between being driven by mythology, wishful thinking,and pure falsehood. Follow the link -- we already know what the wagest of socialism are!

Sanders’s vision of Scandinavian countries, as with much of his ideology, seems to be stuck in the 1960s and 1970s, a period when these countries were indeed pioneers in creating a social market economy. In Sweden, government spending as a percentage of gross domestic product doubled from 1960 to 1980, going from approximately 30 percent to 60 percent. But as Swedish commentator Johan Norberg points out, this experiment in Sanders-style democratic socialism tanked the Swedish economy. Between 1970 and 1995, he notes, Sweden did not create a single net new job in the private sector. In 1991, a free-market prime minister, Carl Bildt, initiated a series of reforms to kick-start the economy. By the mid-2000s, Sweden had cut the size of its government by a third and emerged from its long economic slump.

Corona, The Socialist Virus

https://www.patreon.com/posts/birth-of-virus-34396633?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=postshare&fbclid=IwAR0ayUFt7ooWsbW2jSI4lGDMCD5iPkNDKHea7ONNzwgpYLBWU4OXeZ92v5s

Read the post ... it is a real life experience and it just might awaken your latent common sense.

First of all, split crotch pants for toddlers are common in China.

Second, as everyone is now aware, we HAVE the socialist virus, and HAVE had it since at least FDR. Like any contagion, it spreads, and like all the serious contagions it is extremely likely to kill, or at least severely injure the host (in this case the US).

Here is a little first hand insight to how people live under socialism in China.

Over the next several days and weeks, we would experience the amazing culture of China, in several different cities. But some things stood out to this germophobic American. I watched a man hock up something from his chest and spit it on the floor, right next to us, in a restaurant. No oysters for me, thanks. I’ve suddenly lost my appetite.

We visited a Hutong (inner city - where the locals live) and saw raw chickens, skinned and bleeding, just laying on the floor, waiting to be thrown on a restaurant grill…for public consumption. No FDA or USDA or food inspectors or “codes” to comply with, here. But why? This is the last purely communist country on earth. You’d think there would be red tape everywhere. What was happening here?

Well, "what was happening" is what happens in all cases were there is no competitive pressure. A race to the bottom. Why would "government officials" care and work hard to cast a watchful eye when they could not be voted out? Think public housing or public transportation in the US.

If you maintain the thought that "humans are basically good", "Shantung Compound" is strong evidence against that faith.

It is easy to get confused here -- you might validly observe that the FDA and USDA in the US are more likely to be OVER protective. True. Consider however that in the US the coffers of the bureaucracy for extending itself are close to unlimited, so more rules, inspections, etc generally mean more power and money for the agency, we still have freedom of speech to complain,  and the ability to exert a little control over even the bureaucracy through voting.

In China, the government already HAS all the power, plus media control -- they are not going to be "voted out"!

As you watch the virus spread, watch which countries are hit worse and consider what type of government they have. MAYBE the US will be hit worst ... maybe it is me that learns, and if that is the case, I will. What about you?

I read the book "Guns, Germs, and Steel" and failed to blog on it. One of its contentions was that the Europeans basically used "germ warfare" against the Indians ... although there is a lot of questions about how much understanding there really was of germs in the 1400s - 1700s.

Today we at least scientifically have a decent understanding of germs and immunity, but it seems pretty clear we still generally lack a "common sense" understanding. We scientifically know that peanut allergies among other things are "caused" by lack of exposure allowing the immune system to properly adapt at the correct phase of development.

Children are being raised in a much to antiseptic environment in the US and Western Europe, so their immune systems are less developed and they are more vulnerable to viral and bacterial infection. If you have ever traveled to Africa, India, or other such places, you have taken a battery of inoculations against things we have not had to worry about in the US for a long time.

It is very likely that our population will suffer the same effect as the American Indian -- pathogens bred in less developed, or differently developed nations will be transported here and attack our less developed immune systems. Perhaps this turnabout is cosmic justice? Or maybe it is just the price of "outsourcing" our common sense to "experts".

Will socialism kill us because it breeds killer pathogens in socialist nations that get introduced here to kill millions? Or will the political socialist pathogen continue increase it's domination of our system until we are living and dying in squalor here at home?

Unless we become more aware, it is likely one or the other.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2002387?query=recirc_curatedRelated_article

Killing The Extended Family Was a Mistake

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/03/the-nuclear-family-was-a-mistake/605536/

A fairly concise statement on a maior reason why America has a large wealth gap.

If you want to summarize the changes in family structure over the past century, the truest thing to say is this: We’ve made life freer for individuals and more unstable for families. We’ve made life better for adults but worse for children. We’ve moved from big, interconnected, and extended families, which helped protect the most vulnerable people in society from the shocks of life, to smaller, detached nuclear families (a married couple and their children), which give the most privileged people in society room to maximize their talents and expand their options. The shift from bigger and interconnected extended families to smaller and detached nuclear families ultimately led to a familial system that liberates the rich and ravages the working-class and the poor.

It's the Atlantic, and Brooks, so the flight from religion is largely ignored ... and it is always hard to empirically decide the "chicken and egg" between economics, technology, sociology, culture, religion, etc ... it's a bit of a "scramble".

When you put everything together, we’re likely living through the most rapid change in family structure in human history. The causes are economic, cultural, and institutional all at once. People who grow up in a nuclear family tend to have a more individualistic mind-set than people who grow up in a multigenerational extended clan. People with an individualistic mind-set tend to be less willing to sacrifice self for the sake of the family, and the result is more family disruption. People who grow up in disrupted families have more trouble getting the education they need to have prosperous careers. People who don’t have prosperous careers have trouble building stable families, because of financial challenges and other stressors. The children in those families become more isolated and more traumatized.

In any case, more supporting information for what we know -- the cost of "it's all for ME, the individual" is very high!

Has American Christianity Failed?

This book spoke to me because the author followed a path to Christ similar to mine. The biggest difference is that  he WAS baptized as an infant (and I wasn't, I was baptized as adult to "follow Christ") ... no matter, Baptism is Christ's work, not mans. It is effective because Christ does it (in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit), and we (fortunately) can't screw it up!

The author then went through the "personal decision for Christ", "personal relationship with Jesus", "living" (or attempting to live) " the law based American Christianity. Then eventually finding  (Christ finding for him) the sacramental life in Christ.

He sums up the experience of American Christianity (AC) very well as a constant cycle between pride and despair.

American Christianity fails because its yoke is wearisome. Its burden is heavy. Having taken its eyes off of Jesus as the Author and Perfecter of faith, American Christianity replaces the work of the Holy Spirit with the choice of the sinner. It replaces the comfort of the Gospel with the doubt of our resolve. It replaces the certainty of God’s promise with the shakiness of our feelings. It puts burdens and doubts where the Lord would give us freedom and faith.

The focus of AC is on YOUR DECISION vs Christ Crucified and the free gift of salvation through Baptism, Holy Communion and Holy Scripture. The focus of Confessional Christianity is on Christ Crucified FOR YOU  ... and gifts given to you through Baptism, Communion and the preaching of the Gospel. It is GIVEN to you, it isn't "about you", your decision, your obedience, your faith.

As I like to say when asked "when were you saved"? My answer is "about 2K years ago when Christ died on the cross for my sins".

God has not promised the feeling of forgiveness. He promises forgiveness itself, if we feel it or not. God has not promised that we will experience His presence.

AC believes in Grace for the unbeliever, Law for the believer. The believer is expected to believe that they really only know they are "saved" because of the evidence of their pietism ...  they "don't drink, don't smoke, don't lust, they go to a lot of church or "church things". If they fail to meet some standard of this, are they "really saved"? They can never honestly have assurance ... they can only have hope.

Therefore ...

Pietism ends either in the sin of pride or the sin of despair.

We have all seen it ... the "holier than thou" AC, or the "fallen"  AC -- depending on your AC "brand", your congregations standards of pietism will vary, but it will always be there.

AC is often about spiritual enthusiasm ... 

Theological enthusiasm is the promotion of the internal testimony of “God” over the external testimony of the Scriptures. The enthusiast sees all the action on the inside.

In the past "30 years or so",  AC has moved to the praise band, rock and roll "Christian" songs, dry ice "smoke" on the stage, fancy lights, lots of ripped blue jeans, etc. It is meant to be entertaining and "authentic". You are supposed to have a lot of warm and excited feelings that give you "proof" of your salvation. If you don't have those feelings, how can you be sure you are "saved"?  

So what about Baptism, which the Bible directly says "saves you"? ( 1 Peter 3:21) "Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,"

For AC, this is a "hard teaching" like Matthew 16:28  "This IS my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins." Much like Bill Clinton, "is" is a hard word for AC. In the words of Wolfmueller relative to his AC EXPERIENCE: 

I said, “Baptism is a physical thing; it is not in my heart, so it can’t save me.” That is enthusiasm in action. It is the theological logic behind the rejection of the saving work of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. It is what makes American Christianity so individualistic. Enthusiasm is what drives the terrible swing between pride and despair that marks the life of most American Christians.

 The Bible isn't very hopeful for us keeping the Law ... in fact, Christ died BECAUSE we are not able to keep the law -- never. The most pious are certain to fail the Law in the way that Christ had the most nasty things to say about -- because they are human, when we focus on the law, pride is a certain result, at heart, we are all spiritual toddlers -- "look at me!", "look what **I** did!" -- and often that pride is a sin that we will pridefully refuse to admit because "we are most certainly less prideful than most"!

God DOES enjoy our attempts at good works very much. Much as a loving parent enjoys the toddlers "help" with a task. Certainly, we attempt to do good works -- and then we repent of the pride we are bound to feel because we are still sinners.

“Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?” (Galatians 3:3).

Whenever you have a “Jesus and . . .” theology, it is the “and” that matters. If our theology is “Jesus and our efforts,” then the thing that matters is our efforts. The Gospel is diminished, and the Law is exalted.

Jesus will not let you be your savior. Salvation belongs to Him alone.

This book is so full of scriptural Grace and Truth  that it is overflowing. It gets into eschatology, which is the source of a LOT of AC confusion. It does a super SCRIPTURAL, yet easy to follow, defense of the fact that we are IN the "millenium".  vs waiting and watching for it, which is the source of a lot of AC error. 

One of my bigger remembrances of growing up Baptist was the extreme focus on the 2nd coming, and the supposed Biblical "fact" that when that happened, the unbelievers would be "left behind". This all has to do with the AC doctrine of "premillennialism dispensationalism".

The idea that those who are not taken to the Lord will go about wondering what happened to their friends is nowhere in the text, as if those who were swept away by the flood were puzzled over the whereabouts of Noah. In the days of Noah, the flood came and took away all the unbelievers. So it will be on the Last Day. Jesus will return, and the unbelievers will be taken away in judgment. To be taken away is the bad thing. To be left behind is what we want, to stand before the Lord in His glory.

A core of Lutheran theology is that it uses the Bible to interpret the Bible ... for example when Jesus says to Peter how many times he must forgive his brother, Jesus says -- "I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.".

It is pretty easy for us to understand that Jesus is not telling Peter to get out a clicker, and when he gets to 491, he is justified in telling his brother he is out of luck -- he reached "the limit" of forgiveness. 

Much of understanding the eschatology relies on this type of hermeneutics (the method used for interpretation, using the Bible to interpret the Bible) -- when is a "number" a counting number, and when is it a statement of magnitude? There is a reason for understanding Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, Latin, etc -- as well as understanding some things in the context of the times (eg donkey vs horse, washing feet, greeting with a kiss, etc) 

A highly recommended for ALL, but especially for those caught in the pride/despair cycle of AC and being concerned about "how they feel". 

Narcissistic Civilization Threat

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/ambigamy/202002/how-humiliate-absolute-narcissist

I was struck by this quote ...

No society has ever found an antidote to an absolute narcissism epidemic. Instead, the epidemics have died eventually simply because no one can pretend they’re righter than reality forever. Such movements eventually lose their battle against reality, though often causing mass destruction in the process. The most likely cause of humankind’s eventual extinction is runaway confirmation bias of absolute narcissist movements whether through world domination or the conflagration that results from infallibility battles between opposing absolute narcissist movements.

I'd argue that Western civilization had the antidote up to "the late 1800's" ... the PRACTICE of Christian living. However, Darwin, Nietzsche, Lenin and others, ushered in godless materialism, and in the early 20th century, mankind paid for the worship of this "golden calf" with more than 100 million lives.

My view is that the root causes of this "Societal level Narcissism" are the twin terrors of absolute thinking and human nature. "The cure" is humility ... the daily recognition that "The beginning of wisdom is the fear of God", and the practice of allowing Christ to change the heart through the Word and the Sacraments.

For 200 years in America, a Christian base and an intellectual elite that believed in Natural Rights was enough to make a great nation.

 Much of modernity would either tell you that there is no such thing as "reality", it is all a "social construct". Secular materialist positivist humanism would tell you that there DEFINITELY IS, and they are RIGHT! My guess is that the author of the linked would have a lot of trouble with Moral Believing Animals. Because ,,,

For example, if they play prude, saying, “Don’t be a mean name-caller,” say to the audience, “This fool doesn’t even notice that name-caller is a name. We all name call. We’re all mean sometimes. I’m trying to name call with precision, and I’m mean where I think meanness is earned. This absolute narcissist doesn’t care about name-calling or meanness. They pretend to care when it helps them pretend they’re eternally right and righteous. Pitiful.”

One wonders why the link author is so adamant that the people he labels as "Absolute Narcissists" must be "humiliated"?  Why "humiliated" vs "calmly challenged", "exposed to other points of view", or some such vs "humiliated"? My very biased guess is that he has Trump in mind, and believes he could be "humiliated". Perhaps.

And thus the Narcissistic Civilization Threat. We see clear evidence of this threat on both the "Trump Train" and the Bernie / Bloomie candidacies ... and if we dig just a little, it's everywhere, because when it comes to our basic beliefs, we ALL accept them on faith and faith alone -- for humans, there really isn't any "objective reality", only the "narrative" that each of us has.

My view is that Trump is far less a threat since he supports Christians being allowed to worship -- not so clear in Bernie / Bloomy.

The Ruminator, Mindfulness

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/practical-mindfulness/202002/one-word-stops-ruminating-the-future?amp=

For most of my life, in homage to famous movie character, "The Terminator", I would be better called "The Ruminator". My brain likes to endlessly play out scenarios of the future, analysis of the present, always with a strong bias to imagined negative outcomes / thoughts. Much like a recovering alcoholic, I'm a ruminator in recovery -- one day, when I see my Lord, I'll be "cured".

Through Mindfulness -- the subject of the linked, and a lot of prayer, my "monkey mind" chatters less. I've also learned to appreciate the GIFT of an active mind ... one that questions, searches, considers options, naturally thinks critically, etc. Like every piece of our human existence, the tendency to "overthink" is both a blessing and a curse.

A good article. It also makes me think of Eckhart Tolle.

I especially liked this from the article ...

As I wrote in my book 101 Mindful Ways to Build Resilience: "Uncertainty is the keystone of life. The truth is this: No one can purchase or own the future."

As simple as ACCEPT what is, and what will be. And as complicated ...

The Rediscovery Of America, Jaffa

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/41116095-the-rediscovery-of-america

I've discovered Harry Jaffa via the Power Line Podcast with Steven Hayward ... it is a great discovery. The subject book now has a LOT of tabs and markings, so if I lend it to anyone, laughter is assured!

The theme of the book is Natural Rights, and understanding that if one does not believe in Natural Rights, then the Declaration of Independence, America, and Western civilization have no foundation.

Page 108; "The mind frees itself from all sense perception whenever it employs a universal, that is, a common noun -- the ground and basis of what we call common sense -- is at once the basis of the most common experience, and the greatest of all miracles. It exhibits the mind detached from matter, understanding material things simply because it is detached from them." 

Page 109, "A philosophy or metaphysics that denies the metaphysical freedom of mind that was axiomatic for Jefferson can have no part in liberal education, for liberal education means education in freedom and for freedom. It means education in the metaphysical reality of such a universe that the Declaration of Independence proclaims." 

He states a truth I believe to be self evident on p154; "Of all the words that have poisoned public discourse, none has done more damage than the word "value" used as a synonym for moral or political choice".

If there are no "self evident principles", then all is "value" ... a relative term, so it seems sensible for you to have "your values" and I to have "my values" -- which "Moral Believing Animals" would state is not possible. We ALL believe in SOME set of universally applicable truths, and if we don't have significant intersection in those foundational beliefs, we have extreme difficulty communicating, because our human nature is irrevocably tribal outside of a shared moral reality.

Jaffa has harsh words for Bork, Harvey Mansfield, Rehnquist, Bloom, and others who call themselves "conservative" because they have knowingly or unknowingly denied universals -- in which case, John C Calhoun, defender of slavery was correct -- "Morality" just means "power" as in "Might is right". 

A superb book to discover the cost of the denial of universals -- deny god and you get Nietzsche and "all is permissible".  You can't prove (or disprove) God, however if you refuse to believe in him there is a definite earthy cost, and I believe an even harsher eternal cost.

Moral Believing Animals

https://www.goodreads.com/notes/19220626-moral-believing-animals/6923915-bill-berg?ref=bsop

Love the book, hate the title. Yes, we are "creatures", so "animal" is accurate at one level, however it is a dangerous term -- it can lead to genocide, abortion, euthanasia and all manner of depravity. "Beings" would be my preferred term., and a much better representation of the content of the book.

The book makes a strong case for what I believe to the clearest fact of human existence, EVERYTHING we do is "faith based". NOTHING is epistemologically "provable", since our very consciousness, which we don't understand, is running on wetware (our brains) that we also don't understand -- we ALL walk by faith, the only question is "in what"?

Science as we know it can only ever proceed by first placing faith in a set of unprovable cosmological, metaphysical, and epistemological assumptions and commitments." And science as we know it proceeds by hitching its wagon to a set of nineteenth-century general assumptions about civilization, progress, knowledge, and morality. Science may have put a man on the moon (which was itself a morally, politically, and emotionally pregnant endeavor). But we cannot say that science is exempt from the moral and believing character of humans and society. 

We all live a narrative ... a story, founded on nested sets of beliefs that are coupled with other believed relationships, which Smith models as "rafts" (worldviews)  ...

Well-educated moderns are, of course, socialized to see other rafts. We are educated to recognize, tolerate, and appreciate a diversity of perspectives, paradigms, and cultures. At least to a point. For this modern, Mult versioned self is itself, of course, an historically situated position constituted by faith commitments to particular basic assumptions and beliefs-about individuality, autonomy, cosmopolitanism, equality, relativity, self-expression, truth, and so on. And when occasions arise that threaten these trusted assumptions and beliefs, sophisticated, flexible, tolerant, liberal, ... etc. we fight, even to the death.

If you question any of the foundational beliefs of these well-educated moderns however ... by saying that there IS an absolute truth, and it isn't theirs, or that "equality" is a demonstrable metaphysical impossibility, their "tolerance" quickly becomes similar to that of a Muslim jihadi!

So, since faith is all any of us have, our task is to see that we are ALL in a "faith boat" (which itself is likely "floating" in possibly stacked other "boats") and those boats are not "equivalent", nor are any "scientifically true" belief systems that rationally allow us to look down on other belief systems past or present. As believers, our human tendency is to assume that OUR belief system is "enlightened", "progressive", "divinely inspired", "rational", etc.  We are like fish in water not knowing or even having the concept of "wet".

The world we bring into being through believing has for us become fixed, unified, total. We are thus not in the end very different in this condition than the medieval peasant from whom the Enlightenment promised to raise and deliver us.

The point, rather, is that for all of our science, rationality, and technology, we moderns are no less the makers, tellers, and believers of narrative construals of existence, history, and purpose than were our forebears at any other time in human history. But more than that, we not only continue to be animals who make stories but also animals who are made by our stories.

So, we are certain to believe (the question is "in what"! ) -- and tragically, we can easily select a nihilist narrative that life is meaningless and there is no hope beyond this mortal coil -- OR, we can believe that we are unique creations of a loving God with a divine purpose that can be given to us by Grace! (and many of us believe that faith is only through the GIFT of the Holy Spirit). 

Our individual and collective lives come to have meaning and purpose insofar as they join the larger cast of characters enacting, reenacting, and perpetuating the larger narrative. It is by finding ourselves placed within a particular drama that we come to know our role, our part, our lines in life-how we are to act, why, and what meaning that has in a larger scheme of reality.

On page 117, he seems to agree with a theistic, though not specifically Christian belief model: "and so I am inclined to leave the matter here and maintain the parsimonious theistic explanation as my proposed theory."  

 The book makes an excellent sociological / philosophical case that humility is the root of wisdom ... in complete agreement with Socrates and the Bible. It does however make that case in a somewhat technical manner that may be difficult for some.