Indeed!

I don't know that much about superstring theory, but I pretty much like the way you use it as a metaphor to clarify we the way we humans always see just a limited interpretation of a world which is vast and more rich than our ability to perceive.

A lot of times I've been thinking what would "my ideas are the right ideas" mean. And, on the practical level of world history, it indeed seems to mean that "it is OK for us to burn heretics / to conquer the lands of barbarians with evil superstitions / to bomb those non-democratic terrorists so that the survivors will learn to respect Real Democracy and Freedom!" - oh, sorry, I'm getting dangerously close to joking about world politics =) But since I was kid, USA and USSR threatening each other with a mutual destruction seemed to me being basically the same as my parents having a family fight - silly and non-necessary quarrel which could've been avoided with a bit more of patience, benevolence and communication skills.

Hehe, yes, of course this is more or less just faith-based idealism. I mean, there are people out there who believe that The Reality is that mankind is divided to rival groups, that each group has to stick together to stay strong, and to prosper any group has to be strong enough to out-compete the other groups. This line of thinking then leads to world wars, as we have seen. Yet, many people believe that we humans are hardwired to behave like that, and it is illusionary naive idealism to think otherwise.

Personally, I think otherwise. I find it perfectly possible to learn ways which help to avoid outright conflict. Ways which promote friendly co-operation, or at least peaceful co-existence (we don't have to be close friends with everyone, but at least we can leave others alone instead of bullying them for being different). Also, I think that learning these more peaceful ways is fun, and sometimes also easy, but sometimes a long slow process. I know I can't prove this being universally true - my views are based mostly on my own experience of growing from a bullying kid to a benevolent adult. And, my horse stories are a way to examine these ways in action. As I have said, I think that human social behavior shares a lot with horse herd behavior, so the emotional, social and practical things which work with horses are likely to find and adaptation in human world, too.

So, if I can't prove my ideas being right, I can still feel that for me, my ideas help me. But that is, because for me "smooth co-operation or at least peaceful co-existence" is a value in itself. And I evaluate metaphors according to how they help in that.

I think that religious metaphors, like literally believing in creation, they have two main functions: They provide existential answers for individuals, and they help a group of individuals to stick together as a group with shared values, shared metaphors, shared goals. Obviously, some religions or set of ideas are doing a very good job in that - they convince the group members that they are the Pure Real Humans, and one should not question the group values because outside the group everyone is Bad Heretic Sub-Human. Do you want to be a heretic sub-human? No? Then stay with our group! Also, let's go save those heretics, let's convince or force them to adopt our views!

So, the way I see it; group cohesion metaphors are good in what they do, but if they have a side-effect of hindering the co-existence of different groups, then it starts to get dangerous. Especially if those groups have nukes at their disposal.

Personally, I think if we wasted a little less money on military, as a humanity we would see more prosperous future, more rapid development in culture and social justice. By social justice I just mean any models where the well-being of one group is not based on oppressing other groups - an another faith-based idealism =) So, in this sense, I kind of a think that the world would be a better place if more people adopted more peaceful views and metaphors to navigate with.

But then, I'm perfectly aware that, in a way, that is what Daesh / ISIL thinks, too - if everybody was a member of Daesh, then there would be peace on earth, there would be law and order and prosperous culture, right? Yeah, for everyone who agrees, for everyone who doesn't question the group leadership, for everyone who is happy to go with the group standards and values... In a way, I think that this "since we can't know the absolute truth, we just have these metaphors which help us to navigate the world, and there are different metaphors for different people" is somehow essentially different from faith-based in-group ideology. Namely, because that kind of agnostic model acknowledges and respects the mutual co-existence of different groups. It doesn't aim at conquering the whole world into one big supreme Empire of The Good King aka. The Great Leader.

Hehe, in a way I think that those ancient Chinese hermits shared a lot of this kind of thinking. And when they found out that The Emperor isn't that interested in learning that kind of ideas, instead of preaching they chose to retire to the mountains. Now, that is somewhat along the lines I'm thinking of my life, although I'm not a total hermit. I don't want to preach my ideas to the rest of the world. But I'm open to discussion, when it feels like that. I do minimally participate in the political life of Finland and EU, and sometimes I participate in the grass-roots social discussion about hot topics. But I'm not very active with it, as it often seems more like just draining my energy.

Ah, one final note. Sometimes I see atheists who claim that any religion is harmful, and that religious thinking should be abandoned as obsolete superstition. But to me that seems a bit like mis-interpretation, too. And it is dangerously close to the religious idea of "let's convert all the heretics to adopt our ideology, then there would be peace on earth!". I'm not a member of any organized religion, but I do respect the faith of others. And I see that nowadays in Finland many of the central figures in our mainstream Christianity think that religion is about bringing people together, not about judging others. Reverends who say that Christianity is just one tradition among the others, one set of metaphors to help us connect with The Holy - so that different traditions can peacefully co-exist and respect each other. Also, that is what some moderate Muslim teachers say, too. And, in my eyes, that is something to be respected, instead of attacked because of militant atheism. But then, of course there are also more fundamental believers and preachers, who think that those liberal clerics are Evil. Also, I once talked with a guy who was so upset when he heard that I reared sheep for meat to eat - because for him it was a normal tradition to raise pigs to eat pork, and he found it so very strange to think about someone doing it differently. He tried to convert me to adopt his ways, but I refused =)