The Case For Universalism

In a post on LessWrong, Rishabh.ambavanekar@gmail.com presents a rationalist critique of prevailing philosophical doctrines, arguing that they all suffer from a fundamental flaw: they are built on assumptions derived from incomplete cosmic knowledge. The author takes aim at nihilism, existentialism, and absurdism, which share the premise that the universe is meaningless. While acknowledging no evidence of cosmic purpose exists, the post asserts that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, comparing our situation to trying to plot a polynomial with a single data point. Religion is similarly dismissed for prescribing purpose without verification through universal knowledge.

The post then extends its critique to soteriological religions (like Buddhism), altruism, and hedonism, arguing they mistakenly treat the individual and universe as separate entities. From a universal lens, the author contends, we are merely subsets of particles in a unified system, making optimization for the individual or society akin to optimizing for a pinky instead of the whole body. Universalism emerges as the only logical path: acquire all cosmic knowledge first, then determine if purpose exists. The post signals further exploration of metaphysics from a rationalist perspective, calling for a radical epistemic humility before any life-guiding philosophy.