Something the Orthodox and the Catholics have in common is the insistence that the wine and bread in communion are literally the blood and body of Christ. This makes it interesting because a two year old could figure out that isn’t true. You can look at it and see it’s not blood, and if it’s not blood it’s not Jesus’s blood unless Jesus has wine for blood (and that idea just upsets the priest more than the idea that you aren’t buying his bullshit definition of “literal”). As far as basic tests of logic and realism go, transubstantiation isn’t a hard one. The apologetics they bring out are laughable at best.
So that raises the question of why humans have beliefs like this. One possibility is they’re just errant for no reason (i.e. sin), but things that have no reason tend not to recur and persist. The next possibility* is that they’re errant in a common way for a common reason. That raises the question of whether it’s a good enough reason, or a categorically bad one, or somewhere in the middle. For example, people have believed a lot of stupid things about masturbation (it will make your dick fall off) that were factually incorrect but correct in the meta sense of accidentally communicating that “masturbation is bad and bad for you”. (Incidentally, I wholeheartedly recommend The Social Dilemma on Netflix for the same reason. Put down the smartphone or cigar-chomping canard-free capitalists gonna eat your soul! It’s like Nazis if you really think about it.)
A big problem with challenging dogmas like this is all the neurotypicals lose their minds very quickly in the absence of unquestionable moral authorities. Like, one time back around 1500 a priest apologized to a woman for bumping her in the street and now we have children doing strip teases on TV. I wonder if neurotypicals are simply incapable of showing reverence to things they’re allowed to be logical about. If we presume that women can go to heaven, as a thought experiment, that means normal people can go to heaven because all women are normies. I.e. As soon as you admit that a ritual is symbolic, it stops working for them and they go on opiates and abort their babies. Since group-ism is all the rage right now, we think healthy breeding is important. Pure autism clearly isn’t the answer, because the Enlightenment was our fault and the fruits of Protestantism have been a mixed bag in the breeding department.
This all leads me to consider whether there’s a golden mean of moral pragmatism that’s necessary for maintaining the breeder class. A responsible leader can’t throw out the truth entirely, even if the breeding stock constantly demand it as an expression of their will to power, but there appear to be specific untruths they want to believe that it would be wrong to take away from them on account of the societal consequences alone. What things then, specifically, must be held as Absolutely Taboo Unquestionable Mysteries (ATUMs)? These things appear to center around tradition, the group, hierarchy, and the absolute primacy of System 1 cognition over System 2 cognition. But these ATUMs must be prevented from overreaches too, like the seemingly inevitable evolution of national pride into WE WUZ ISREALITES will-to-status fantasies.
This whole thing feels a lot like managing the female rationalization hamster. I wish Heartiste hadn’t gotten on the Trump train, I feel like he would still be blogging.
*The other possibilities, such as Descartes’s evil genius demon or Tex’s One Holy Autistic Catholic Church, are not worth getting into right now.