In the Future History, science progresses but society regresses until a US theocracy misuses technology to fake the annual miraculous return of the First Prophet from Heaven. In the Psychotechnic History, science progresses until it satisfies physical but not psychological needs. I think that there is a contradiction here because those sciences included predictive psychodynamics which should have addressed mass psychological needs or at least should not simply have ignored them. However, we must accept Anderson's premises for the sake of his narrative.
The Future Historical Angels of the Lord oppose secularism with religion whereas the Psychotechnic Historical Humanists oppose reason alone with "humanism." The Humanist, Lundgren, says that:
"'...the scientific method doesn't have all the answers.'" (III, p. 33)
- although he specifically rejects a religious solution. However, he also mentions Asian resistance to scientific Enlightenment and, in "Brake," we learn that there are American Kali-worshippers.
I remember my Northern Irish aunt-in-law's response to spiritualism:
"Thon's going against the Bible and religion! I don't think much of the Brethren but give me the Brethren before thon!"
11 comments:
Obviously, the methods of the psychotechnicians aren't as effective as they think they are. A phenomenon which happens all the time.
Kaor, Paul!
Besides what Stirling said, I don't believe in the PRACTICALITY of the psychodynamics of the psychotechnicians. Not unless they had the power to directly experiment on humans.
Also, my view is that Heinlein, because of his dislike for Evangelical Protestants, unjustly smeared them with Nehemiah Scudder and his theocratic dictatorship.
I agree with your aunt-in-law's dismissal of Spiritualism, but who were these "Brethren" she mentioned?
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
I don't know for sure but there is a sect called Plymouth Brethren who forbid their members to mix with the rest of society.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
I'll look them up. They might be a spin off of the Mennonites and Amish.
Ad astra! Sean
I just checked the Wikipedia article on them.
Plymouth Brethren don't seem closely related to Mennonites. At least one branch of them accept infant baptism, while Mennonites are one sect that regards baptism of someone too young to understand the doctrines of the church to be invalid.
Mennonite sects vary in the degree to which they isolate from outside society or avoid modern technologies.
Between what my father said about growing up in one Mennonite community (he never joined the church) and reading about the sect because of interest in what my ancestors believed, I have a fair knowledge of Mennonite beliefs.
Kaor, Jim!
I did look up the Plymouth Brethren, and you are right, the P.B. are not Mennonites/Amish. Rather, they split off from the Anglicans. Which surprised me a bit.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean: Anglicanism contained/contains tendencies ranging from extreme Protestantism to "virtually Catholic" to Broad Church types (many of whom are and were barely deists). And that's not an exhaustive list.
Plus a lot of people who, like Elizabeth I, were religious but simply didn't think theological hairsplitting was very important.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
Oh I did know of how confusingly chaotic Anglicanism could be, with its high, low, broad church, etc., divisions. I thought "Plymouth Brethren" had a vaguely Mennonite "feel" to it.
I recall reading that one big reason for why the ARCIC discussions between the Anglicans and the Catholics broke down (besides irreconcilable doctrinal disagreements) were from the latter complaining the Anglicans could not agree among themselves on WHAT they believed.
Passionately convinced Catholics and Anglicans would not agree with Elizabeth I! Btw, I've read the late Queen Elizabeth II was a devout low church Anglican.
Ad astra! Sean
The C of E is in the shape of a cross: high; low; middle; broad.
Paul: or as we put it, "Something for Everyone!" 8-).
My family have always been High Church. Goes with being a Bishop-And-King tory.
"There are many roads to heaven, but a gentleman takes the Anglican road."
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
Being a gentleman is a good thing, I agree. But I believe in following the road I believe God wants us to follow, the Catholic Church.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment