Why Do Things Ever Turn Out Right?

This morning I read an undistinguished essay on why people believe true things. I only skimmed it, but in it the author makes the point that asking why people believe false things is the wrong question -- similar to asking why poverty exists when it is the default position of mankind. 

The more interesting question is how and why wealth exists -- likewise, how and why people ever come to believe true things. Why isn't everyone poor and stupid, and come to think of it, why does anything ever turn out right?

As per yesterday's post, human nature hasn't changed in the past 50 to 65,000 years. Presumably idiocy has always existed, the difference being that today's idiots are equipped with weapons like literacy, credentials, and ideology, and are therefore that much more dangerous. 

Is it enough to just stipulate that man is fallen and be done with it? Or is it possible to understand the reasons why things ever turn out right? In the words of our resident hipster poet Mose Allison, 

You know I used to be troubled, but I finally saw the light

Now I don't worry 'bout a thing, 'cause I know nothin's gonna be alright

Which tracks with our equally good humored Aphorist, who says that

With good humor and pessimism it is possible to be neither wrong nor bored.

As for why things inevitably go sideways, he has many things to say:  

Political blunders are repeated, because they are the expression of human nature. Successes are not repeated because they are the gift of history.

History? It only

shows that man's good ideas are accidental and his mistakes methodical.

Which is why

None of the high eras of history have been planned. The reformer can only be credited with the errors.

Ultimately,  

Intelligent optimism is never faith in progress, but hope for a miracle.

What can we conclude from the above quotations? That nothin's gonna turn out alright short of a vertical ingression, to which we look forward with great pessimism and good humor.  

Back to the question of what interferes with things turning out okay, man isn't just intelligence; rather, he is also will and sentiment, which is where the real trouble starts. Intelligence can only go so wrong without other non-cognitive factors coming into play.

For example, it seems that man has an in-built need for "distinction," or for being seen as special. Everyone wants to be "alpha" in some way, even if it is in a sneaky, passive-aggressive, or trivial way. 

For example, regarding the latter, in my own head I am Alpha (long form) Blogger, all others being number two, or lower. If I didn't have this delusion to cling to, how could I do this year after year?

Now, there's nothing fundamentally wrong with the desire for distinction. Indeed, it can be quite adaptive in a social context, so long as the distinction being sought is honorable and virtuous. 

For example, the founders were positively neurotic about being seen as disinterested and above reproach, and prickly if not paranoid about their reputations. It's surprising that more of them didn't die in duels.

The point is, mere intelligence isn't nearly enough to ensure one's distinction. After all, half of the population possesses above average intelligence, and who wants to be lumped in with them? 

Above average intelligence is not sufficient to secure any kind of distinction. In order for it to do the job, one would have to be at least two standard deviations above average, placing one in the top two percent. 

To be on the safe side, you might want to be three standard deviations above, which puts you in the top .1%. But then, these latter folks often come with a lot of baggage, for example, an obsession with pigeons.

Nowadays, in search of distinction, millions of people are educated beyond their intelligence, which leads to a host of societal problems, i.e., of stupid people making important decisions over our lives. It is enough to say Brandon. Saying Kamala is redumbdant. Adding Tim is superfoolous.

It should go without saying that education has no effect on IQ, which will remain as low or as high as it is, the rest being puffery, ornamentation, misdirection, and fraud, as in the Wizard of Oz: 

"Why, anybody can have a brain. That's a very mediocre commodity. Every pusillanimous creature that crawls the earth or slinks through the slimy seas has a brain.... 

"Back where I come from we have universities, seats of great learning -- where men go to become great thinkers. And when they come out, they think deep thoughts -- and with no more brains than you have... But! They have one thing you haven't got! A diploma!

"Therefore, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Universitatus Committeeatum e plurbis unum, I hereby confer upon you the honorary degree of Th.D."

"Th.D.?"

"Yeah -- that... that's Dr. of Thinkology!"

Jill Biden, for example, is a typical Doctor of Thinkology, pathetically hungry for the distinction of being called "Doctor," as if this can mask the absence of a brain.

Speaking of movies and brainless but credentialed mediocrities, in his newsletter, Rob Henderson recalls the opening scene of the film The Social Network, when

the Mark Zuckerberg character asks, referring to the Harvard student body, “How do you distinguish yourself in a population of people who all got 1600 on their SATs?”

"Victimhood narratives," says Henderson, "seem to be the answer elite colleges have provided." In fact, unless you are a victim, intelligence is neither here nor there. One must be able to say: I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people have victimized me! 

Henderson recounts the story of a particular student who lied about her background, describing herself 

as a first-generation, low-income, former foster youth in her application to the Ivy League university and, later, the Rhodes Scholarship. After two investigations..., the university is reportedly withholding Fierceton’s degree and she has subsequently withdrawn from the scholarship.

In short, not only do elite universities "incentivize victimhood," but college advisors recommend applicants to "sell your pain." Thus, there is a race to the bottom, with students climbing under each other  to prove they are worthy of the distinction of being authentically pathetic.

A contemporary remake of The Wizard of Oz would have to feature a character who longs to be a genuine victim:

"Why, anybody can have a brain. That's a very mediocre commodity.... 

"Back where I come from we have universities, seats of great indoctrination -- where humans of every conceivable race and inconceivable gender go to become great victims. And when they come out, they feel deeply aggrieved -- and with no more oppression than you've experienced... But! They have one thing you haven't got! A diploma!

"Therefore, by virtue of the authority vested in me, I hereby confer upon you the honorary degree of Vh.D."

"Vh.D.?"

"Yeah -- that... that's Dr. of VictimHood!"

All of this is a transparent inversion of Christian civilization, at the foundation of which is the most consequential victim in history. The entire culture of victimhood is only intelligible in the context of the deep structure of Christianity. It is not so much that we are "post-Christian," rather, in the midst of a Christianity turned upside-down.

To be continued...