As M. Simon’s post on magick reminded me of the practical impediments to willing something to happen (or not), my thoughts drifted back to that marvelous demonstration of magical impotence in 1967, during which the Pentagon failed to levitate as……

This post by Steven den Beste helps explain why some people — those driven by teleological thinking tend to be far more intolerant of disagreement than others. Teleologists inherently don’t believe in unintended side effects when it comes to implemen…

Fred Hiatt tries to weave similarities between how Bush announced his surge and how Obama announced his last week: No wonder conservatives are unhappy with the president. Imagine undermining an announced escalation of troops by simultaneously laying ou…

Your piece does a nice job of describing that philosophy. So what, you say, you materialist, it’s just a premonition. Hey, all of my premonitions come true.

Steve Den Beste has a great piece at Hot Air. I’m going to go out on a limb and say that ThreeSourcers will dig it. He bifurcates materialism (which I would be tempted to call “reason”) with teleology. He then……

Den Beste!……

As did Bill Ramey (December 6, 2009 at 7:35 PM).

I’m not sure the author of the main post has described materialism and teleology accurately. As others have pointed out, Marxism is materialistic.

The post seems to disregard the fact that Obama showed considerable practical skill in getting himself elected. No one defeats the Clinton machine and gets elected to the presidency just by wishing for it.

I’m a teleologist myself. I think life and the cosmos have a purpose, though the purpose may elude a strictly rational examination. To me, the purposelessness of the Dawkinsian “selfish gene” world is enervating and sterile.

I also think believing in a higher purpose is both psychologically and socially useful. One of my chief complaints about Obama is that he does not seem to believe in anything greater than himself.

In reviewing Jay’s 25 point Principia Liberalis* a few things stood out of me. One was that there is little overtly objectionable in most of the comments that Jay makes. For example, 2. Human beings aspire to the good and……

No, I don’t think it’s the majority. I don’t think it’s ever been the majority.

Steven Den Beste on December 6, 2009 at 8:41 PM

The problem is that the materialist recognizes that one vote out of millions has very little chance of affecting the outcome, so is less likely to take the time and effort to vote.

The teleogist thinks that the very act of voting will create the outcome that he wants, so he goes out and votes.

Back in caveman days, we didnt have this problem, the teleologists were all eaten by saber tooth tigers. Apparently this is a regressive trait and waited until a time in out history when natural selection does not apply to reemerge

Daveyardbird on December 6, 2009 at 6:52 PM

I suspect that there is a survival element to teleogical thinking. If you are in a situation that appears hopeless, the material thinker is more likely to give up. The teleogical thinker is more likely to perservere in the face of hopeless odds, because he believes that he has already won.