Hacker News Reader

Comment by jacobwilliamroy | Hacker News Reader

I had a discussion with my church group about this and it was absolutely fascinating. On the one hand they welcomed the ubiquitous observation and judgement of all people, because they thought that would make it easier to control people's behavior. But also someone pointed out that is what the anti-christ would do. In the end there wasn't any real consensus on whether or not mass surveillance was good or bad.

View on HN

Did the church group not already believe there to be an entity capable of ubiquitous observation and judgement of everyone, that as an added bonus happens to be entirely benevolent? I'm not sure how any human-made competition in this department could be beneficial.

This is indeed a big paradox in organized religions.

When I was young my parents wanted me to learn about religions so I could make my own choice about which to follow. But I was constantly like "wtf how does this make sense???". And disruptive in class :) They had to take me out of Sunday school.

Another thing I never understood is predestination in calvinist religions, which are big in Holland. They believe it's already decided whether you go to heaven or hell, regardless of your actions during your life.

So how would you live your life? Personally I'd go for maximum enjoyment because whatever happens is already decided. But no, they're very strict and regimental in general. Never understood why. But of course I did only have Sunday school for a short while :)

> Another thing I never understood is predestination in calvinist religions, which are big in Holland. They believe it's already decided whether you go to heaven or hell, regardless of your actions during your life.

> So how would you live your life? Personally I'd go for maximum enjoyment because whatever happens is already decided. But no, they're very strict and regimental in general. Never understood why. But of course I did only have Sunday school for a short while :)

I heard about the predestination thing well before I heard of Newcomb's paradox, but now I realise this is basically the same as "one box, or both boxes?"

That's terrifying that people thought it was potentially good

Why do your fellow congregants want to control the behavior of others? Why can’t they just focus on their own lives and their own community instead of what other people outside of their community are doing?

Not OP, and I can only speak for the circles I grew up in, but some churches are full of deeply traumatized people. I think some of the authoritarian tendencies have roots in a deep desire/need to regain some kind of feeling of control in their lives, and here’s this group of people that meets every week who provides a level of comfort and community while offering a gospel that can both satisfy that need while making people feel righteous in the process.

I don’t want to doxx myself so I’ll keep the details vague, but both of my parents came from disturbing environments and were subject to things that would universally be understood as deeply traumatic. I think they’re good people, but very very confused, and their fundamentalism was a product of the degree of unresolved trauma/dysfunction in their lives and their need to impose some kind of order on their circumstances.

Not all churches look this way. Mine sure did. Almost everyone had a story. Thankfully I escaped the bubble. But not without consequence. Through no fault of my own, I was indoctrinated into a belief system that I then had to spend decades and counting unwinding and unlearning. I mention this because a lot of people want to focus on other people’s lives because that’s what they were taught to do. People were born into beliefs they didn’t choose.

None of which is to excuse the behavior. But I’ve seen up close where it comes from.

Thanks for sharing your story. Mine is similar. Always interesting to see someone else take this life path.

It’s an interesting path for sure. I’d never wish it on anyone, but the experience has also been useful in its own way.

Email me if you ever want to chat about this stuff.

You may not be paying attention. A decent slice of the population wants the government to control everything, all of the time. These people are all around you, all of the time, no matter where you are.

This assumes quite a bit about the group. Is it wrong to discuss topics like this and share different views? Why do you want to control this groups private discussions?

You are correct that I am making assumptions, I’m assuming this group wants to control the behaviors of people outside of their religious group which may not be the case.

I don’t want to control their discussion, it’s fine to discuss things and share different views. I want to understand why a group of people would welcome a panopticon because it would make people easier to control.

I agree it's a bit of a strange dialogue at church, but there is an emphasis on pius behavior both in public and private so I would guess this is the line of thinking they were going down. I would grant the other commenter that God doesn't need 6g to see you, if you believe in that.

I don't think the parent is controlling the discussion, or really even saying it's wrong to discuss this and share their views. But, by the same token, the parent is also allowed to express their concern about people who do hold these views here.

I think they implied observing the behavior of fellow congregants not outsiders. Not sure if that makes it any better. But I think that’s what the poster meant.

That said it is definitely what any competent authoritarian would want.

Why should they control the behavior of people in their congregation? I associate controlling the members of your own community with cults.

Last time it was the end of the Aries age, when Nero played the role of the antichrist. Today we're approaching the of the end of the Pisces' age, and Nero 2.0, fixed and engrossed, will be equipped with brain reading devices (the future of neuralink), machine intelligence and human-like machines. Thinking in private will be possible only at the abstract level, as all the internal monologue will be carefully recorded and analyzed. He will rise to power on the wings of nihilist technocrats, and will institute the law for those who want to be free, and freedom for those who want to be free from the law.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com