[keiferski]

Hard to say. It might be simply a supply problem- most movies, books etc. don’t really promote this vision of humanity’s place in the world, so it indeed might be a question of accessibility. Historically, belief systems definitely had a wide range of “content” aimed at different levels of society.

But there also seems to be a real interest in “spiritual” needs, whatever that might mean in particular. And so a purely scientific approach may not be enough in the first place.

Personally I think it may be too much of a past-focused narrative to be very compelling. Most successful religions have a vision of the future, not merely the past.

[yldedly]

Do have some proposal for a narrative that could work?

[keiferski]

Big question, and one worthy of a book-length treatment.

One starting point might be what I wrote in a comment here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41358528

So a proposal might be: construct a narrative that defeats these two biases in a convincing way:

But there are two very human biases on display here: the idea that occupying large amounts of physical space is indicative of "importance"; and that things which exist for long durations of time are inherently more valuable. These are human biases and there any many examples in nature of the exact opposite being true.

[em-bee]

why do these biases need to be defeated?

are they getting in the way of finding a middle ground between being lost in space and being the center of the universe? do we need to find a middle ground?

in my opinion a compelling narrative primarily needs to address the problems humanity is facing today: poverty and wealth, climate change, gender equality, war and conflict, disagreement of religion, racism and prejudice, injustice...

i think to address these, it doesn't matter much whether we are lost in space or the center of the universe