Thoughts On Spiritual Validity

I was discussing assorted spiritual issues with a friend during one of our regular calls.* We specifically discussed attempts by people to claim spiritual authority and out of the discussion two ways came to mind that I wanted to discuss. Now that I see them, I really see them, and thus I share my insights and the opportunity to call me on my bullshit.

The first is what I call the Ancient Tradition method. People claim their spiritual path is valid as it’s an Ancient Tradition. The endurance of said tradition over time is a marker of its validity. In addition, those who follow or say they follow the Ancient Tradition thus claim spiritual authority. It’s “old-is-good” essentially.

Of course there’s a few flaws with this method, the first and foremost of which is, if you’re aware of any systems or organizational theory, it’s that time is not a measure of validity. The ability for something to survive is a measure of its ability to survive. There indeed may be other valid reasons for its survival, and in cultural areas it gets fuzzy, but it’s not an immediate measure of actual truth.

But there’s more. The idea that there are unchanging traditions is on the face of reality, pretty laughable. People change, cultures change, ideas change, spiritual leaders change. What you see of a tradition today is not what it was a thousand years ago, or perhaps even ten years ago. Maybe said Ancient Tradition survives because it did change – which might give it more validity if you admit it.

And, of course, plenty of people claim to be the bearers of said Ancient Tradition that are liars, frauds, or self-deceiving. If you follow any “spiritual history” you’ve read about things made up of whole cloth more or less and treated as ancient. Ancient Tradition isn’t what it used to be in some cases, because it never was anything.

The other form of Spiritual Authority I saw was Initiatory Authority. Someone claims a direct revelation, often through great suffering, that granted them power and authority. In modern times, it took on an almost masochistic flavor.

The amount of people I’d see studying modern cults that claimed some horrific trauma that granted them a kind of religious or spiritual insight was disturbing. There was the usual “survivor of satanic abuse” story which was almost disturbingly pat. But there were also refugees from alien-controlled Secret Space Programs, or those claiming to have been mind-controlled by nefarious forces until they broke free. It was validity through suffering.

I mean you get the occasional people who just had deep revelations, but it felt like in modern times suffering was validation. This is why I honestly think some conspiracy theories and cultic behavior are substitutes and declaration of a need for therapy.

(Plus, note how these Initiatory Authorities often tie into Conspiracy Theories in modern times? That also seems to be getting a bit of Ancient Tradition going there.)

Either way, the idea of some kind of Initiatory experience or revelation giving someone authority was common, but also needed validation. Usually these days you just get charisma instead, or at least rage and sarcasm. But validation? Nope.

As we discussed these ideas, I felt I had a better sense of the modern (and perhaps not-so-modern) spiritual landscape. People were trying to claim authority from Ancient Tradition or some kind of Initiatory experience, perhaps both. In the age of the Internet Influencers these seemed even more amplified.

But what was missing was the thing that matters most – does the spiritual tradition actually help out? What good is it? What is it doing for you, for others, for the world? Are there useful techniques that make you saner, happier, calmer, provide insights and practical experiences? Does it work?

The people in charge, the authorities, the initiated, need to prove what they’ve got works. I wasn’t seeing a lot of proof, but I was seeing a whole lot of trying to claim it. Maybe because if you’ve actually got some spiritual goodness going on you don’t need to get flashy (says the Taoist guy).

This is where I get things like people joining religious traditions for community and support – theologically things may be questionable but the community is real. This is where I get why some Buddhists and Taoist practices have endured as they work – the Four Noble truths are helpful and Golden Flower breathing has results.

In the end, I’m interested in results. Those I can understand I can use. Sometimes they surprise me . . .

But when I see Ancient Tradition and Initiatory Authority pop up? I get suspicious. For good reason.

* If you and a friend are busy, or you’re physically distant, try a regular phone chat, like every two weeks or once a month. It’s very helpful and it’s not being on the computer (he writes, on a computer).

Xenofact

But What If We’re No One?

In 2026 there are two trends that I think threaten people’s sense of identity. I mean there’s a lot of bad trends in 2026, so I need to be clear. If you’re reading this in another decade, I hope things are less terrible.

The trends specifically are AI and Prediction Markets (ie gambling). Both trends are destructive. AI is over-rated, over-exposed use of statistical tools to assemble language that overshadows actual useful technology. Prediction Markets are just gambling, only gambling on anything, and gambling has gotten pretty terrible with Sports Betting. They’re wrecking the economy, used to funnel money to the grotesquely rich, and so on – but also they destroy identity by destroying personhood.

Let’s take a look at AI. AI is pitched as a replacement for not just people but for thinking. You can get rid of workers and then they don’t do what they do, what they do as part of their lives and careers. You also can not need to know anything, just prompt an AI and then get Slop you can pass off as something valuable. AI is about degrading knowledge and degrading thought.

You have to learn something, do something, make something to achieve results. AI replaces that, AI means you’re nothing but a prompt-enterer at best. AI replaces people with something that can’t truly do their job as it’s not about being a kind of person. It also replaces being the kind of person that knows and does things with typing a prompt.

AI removes identity from the equation. AI is about not being anything, just weak connective tissue between pretend intelligence. You’re not a person, you’re not anyone.

The Prediction Markets are about bets, periods. There might be some skill involved, but the core skill is to be able to make bets and predict things. That kind of skill isn’t necessarily being used anywhere else, just to try to get a cash payout. Also some people are just placing bets and seeing whatever happens.

And that’s not including market manipulation, which is an important subject as of this writing. What if you’re placing bets then just manipulating what goes on – playing on insider information, making deals, threatening people? Are you building anything? Making anything? Being anyone?

It’s all odds and odds manipulation. There’s no one home, just desires for payoffs. Nothing is coming of it. No one is being anything, just gut bacteria in the odds market.

AI and Prediction Markets are all about poking buttons, statistics, odds, and not building skills, or relations, or learning things that make you someone. It’s a world of emptiness and voidness. It’s techno-economic trends that dehumanize people in many ways.

Do I have any solutions? Well, yes, be skeptical of these things and work to build yourself and others as people – folks with knowledge and skills, and roles, and citizenship. Be sure to keep people skeptical and aware.

But also as I expect both of these to go very wrong, you can also promote regulation, limitations, community opposition, and of course witty “I told you so’s”.

Xenofact

Cultural Cargo Cults Ethics and Taoism

I was reading the Tao Te Ching lately, and Chapter 18 struck me. Let me paraphrase (from Red Pine and a few other translations):

When the Great Way is left, kindness and justice arise

When reason arises, we encounter deceit.

When the six relations fail, we encounter obedience and love.

When the country is in chaos, we acknowledge honest officials.

I take this chapter to be one of failure. If people hold to the Tao, the Great Way, that connectedness-of-reality, you can have an orderly life. When you loose it things fall apart – even if we think we’re being virtuous.

The arising of kindness and justice sounds like a good thing. Reason is a good thing, correct? Yet the entire chapter is one of decline, ending with one of my favorite lines, the acknowledgement of honest officials – when shouldn’t they all be honest?

It’s a curious chapter indeed. Some things we’d think of are good are sneered at. When contemplating it, I had a useful insight relevant to political and social conversations of the day.

The way I read the chapter is the sense of the Tao, that unity, leads to harmony. There are kindness and justice, reason, good relations, and so on, but they are part of a “unified” worldview that is both mystical bust also practical. There may be kindness, honesty, and so on, but they are the result of holding to the Tao – not separate and distinct from it. “True” virtuous things, as it were, things that have a foundation.

But when you loose that sense of unity, everything is broken, out, separate, a substitute. That’s when I thought of the term bandied about these days (in 2026) – “Cargo Cults.”

The term “Cargo Cult Fascism” arose to describe certain would-be strongmen of our age who seemed to think that if they acted like fascist leaders, they’d have automatic compliance. The term spread to other areas of political and social discussion, noting just how much of our society was people acting out things but not actually doing them or caring about them or understanding them. Such people and their actions often failed and fell apart – bad but also dysfunctional.

But if you have “bad” Cargo Cults, that also means you can have ones of people trying to be “good.”

Suddenly, I understood this chapter of the Tao Te Ching better (especially considering the times of Taoist-versus-Confucian). It was about fragmented things, divided from a larger reality, imitative but with no foundation. Past a point you’re just going through the motions and not being anything, and not connected to the Way, the foundation of things, the depth of it all. Your kindness, your morality, no matter how hard you try, is going to be a bit hollow, a bit of an act, without that foundation.

I think that’s also why the last line hits me hard. Imagine a society in so much chaos that saying someone is an “honest minister” is a compliment as opposed to indicating that if that’s exceptional your government sucks. Also maybe that person is just a poser anyway.

Regularly reading great spiritual and philosophical works is good not just for your own spiritual “ecosystem” but for reviewing and thinking over modern and past times. This was a useful insight, helping me understand both past writings and our current situations.

(I mean the situations are both terrible but I understand them better)

Xenofact