Warden religion is:
"...a mystical, ritualistic pantheism..." (p. 125)
- whereas Ranger philosophy is:
"...a harsh materialistic theory of history." (ibid.)
Can a theory be harsh? We can only read between the lines here. I take these phrases to mean that Ranger philosophy is mechanically reductionist, i.e., that it asserts that all that exists is mechanically interacting particles with only the quantifiable properties of mass and volume and that consciousness is "nothing but"/entirely reducible to neuronic interactions. This is an outmoded scientific theory. A more advanced materialist philosophy asserts that energy is dynamic, not mechanical, and that quantitative changes in complexity and sensitivity generate irreducible qualitative transformations, including consciousness.
I would add to this that individuals and groups can intuit their oneness with being/energy and can express this oneness through rituals. Therefore, I expect the later "time wardens" period to synthesize Warden and Ranger world-views.
1 comment:
Kaor, Paul!
Or the Time Wardens might have rejected all forms of materialism and pantheism.
And some of Brann's remarks to Lockridge were anything but harshly materialistic.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment